Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Global perspective

Wikipedia policy?
Hi. Can anyone tell me where I can find a Wikipedia policy or guideline to point people to when I fix an article that has global perspective problems? Thanks. --Gronky 11:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * From my recent experiences with trying to encourage people to adopt a more inclusive attitude towards hemispherism, I'd say the only Wikipedia policy that seems to be relevant here is WP:IAR, which seems to trump WP:NPOV, even though both are part of the five pillars of Wikipedia. Augur NZ &#x2710;  &#x2315;  09:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Misc. stuff from a new participant
Hi, I am very concerned with this subject and from where I am sitting, I've got a pretty good view. I hope to contribute where I can, but stay quite busy with MidEast topics. I decided that joining CSB was the best way to try harder/smarter. So why am I here specifically? It requires a wiki-story. In trying to find a way to counter what I saw as consistent (systematic) bias in MidEast issues, I once went to Village pump to see what was there that might help. Well, I never got past the caption under the 'pump picture'; it made me laugh and cry at the same time. Read it. Maybe they can only speculate, but in many areas of the world I've lived, I know people who would (and do) die for a pump, as compared to the well, muddy creek, or black-water drainage closest to home; go figure. CasualObserver&#39;48 (talk) 06:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Is anyone involved in or watch this page or was it a put together then forgotten page? I think that the fundamental idea is fantastic. Using just the "more common name" of a title (which if very often contested), which could be the more common in one geographical location just because the contributing editors involved are from that area, or possibly because of the interpretations of certain editors involved in naming (or renaming) titles, and maybe even because of some media attention, tend to propagate bias even without the specific intent. I am involved in a title change that is being pushed as more common. While the suggested name does produce more search hits there is current title longevity, continuity with many like titled articles, and the geographical origin of the name(s). This added information seems unimportant or that "common name" is the main and only criteria that is important, and thus by that standard alone bias will certainly always be extended. I would have offered a hello but it appears salutations (Hello CasualObserver), nor answering questions (Gronky), are not important or there simply is no participation. Otr500 (talk) 19:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Template for marking biased geo perspective? Add to Project Page?
Greetings, I know there's a template basically saying "this article may not represent a global view". Can someone ID this template, and perhaps it could be promoted on the Project Page so that others can know to add it to articles that need scrutiny for a wider global perspective? I'm thinking at this point of Timeline of military aviation, where I'm trying to correct a strong British perspective; had to add highly significant Italian and Austrian aircrafts "firsts" which were not mentioned despite British minutiae being listed. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Added few templates to the main page. Cavann (talk) 20:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Global perspective issues in feminism articles
If anyone is still active in this project, can someone comment on the discussion at Talk:Feminism? Thanks --Aronoel (talk) 14:33, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

There is a discussion going on at Talk:George VI of the United Kingdom which may raise some questions about systemic bias on Wikipedia. PatGallacher (talk) 00:19, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Law etc. in different countries
Hello, not sure if anyone is still watching this page. I'm working on an edit of Sexual_abuse_of_people_with_developmental_disabilities, which is flagged up for having a US bias. I'm about to add UK information, but obviously disabled people are everywhere. This article covers points of law around sexual offences, but it would be a very large project to cover all countries, even if limiting oneself to English-speaking countries. I'm not sure how to improve the balance of the article without it getting out of hand. How have others done it? For example, should I cover a sample of countries with large populations (perhaps making my UK section redundant), or maybe focus on countries where Wikipedia is most used (which can only reinforce bias)? I hope this doesn't sound stupid - I will continue with my common-sense edit whist working this one out! Thanks for any advice you can offer. Crinoline (talk) 10:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Sources may be the limiting factor.
 * In many ways the UK is still quite similar the USA (if nothing else, it's rich and anglophone), so adding UK coverage helps, but there would still be room to capture more global variation. But where can you get good sources that discuss abuse in very different societies? bobrayner (talk) 23:35, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Iraq War listed at Requested moves
Moved here from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Global perspective task force. 07:57, 25 September 2015 (UTC) A requested move discussion has been initiated for Iraq War to be moved to Iraq War (2003-2011). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 11:44, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Improving Template:Systemic_bias with the concept of propaganda, especially on academic subjects
Of interest to this project: Improving template with the concept of propaganda, especially on academic subjects. 82.132.244.126 (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposal for new template
Seeking comments from this project’s participants re a template to inform the reader of an article that source selection for that article is per English Wikipedia (WP-en) RS policy and that content presented therein differs substantially from that of . Comments welcome before formalizing this. Thx, Humanengr (talk) 10:46, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Newspapers and Media sources of record in the "Global South" (for lack of a better term)
Hey all! So I help out over at WP:AfC, and it can be difficult sometimes to ascertain whether a BLP from a a different country passes Wikipedia's notability criteria. One thing you might be able to do to help us is to determine what Newspapers and Media sources would count as reliable sources in many of these countries so that when we are assessing notability, we know to trust that the media source is more than just promotional material for the subject. Newspaper of record is helpful, but largely focuses on Western/Developed countries. In a recent deletion discussion, mentioned several Major Nigerian newspapers that may also be considered reliable sources. If you can help clarify this for me, it may help me accept more drafts. For example, Wikipedians from Uganda do a great job with articles on Members of Parliament, sourcing from New Vision and other local sources. Bkissin (talk) 21:00, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Request for comment: Si Kaddour Benghabrit
Hello, I've started a request for comment at at the talk page for Si Kaddour Benghabrit that I believe might concern this WikiProject. The issue is that I'm trying to add information about this person's role in North African politics, but resources are scant and I've had to rely on a primary source. There is a user who prefers less "questionable" Western sources who keeps reverting my edits. إيان (talk) 09:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Draft talk:Decarbonization of shipping
Hello I see you are reviewing this - are you going to submit it again? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I have resubmitted - have you finished your review? Chidgk1 (talk) 19:05, 8 September 2023 (UTC)