This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Industrial Revolution was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Citizendium Porting, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Citizendium PortingWikipedia:WikiProject Citizendium PortingTemplate:WikiProject Citizendium PortingCitizendium Porting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Capitalism, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CapitalismWikipedia:WikiProject CapitalismTemplate:WikiProject CapitalismCapitalism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
Jan Oklum (2010-03-17). "Delvis bestått for Wikipedia (Partly passed for Wikipedia)". Bergens Tidende. Archived from the original on 2010-03-17. (Norwegian)Camilla Brautaset, førsteamanuensis i historie ved Universitetet i Bergen [...] Den engelske Wikipedia-artikkelen om den industrielle revolusjon er for eksempel skrevet ut fra et britisk perspektiv på historien, mener Brautaset. Camilla Brautaset, associate professor in History at University of Bergen [...] the English article about the Industrial Revolution has a British view on the history, says Brautaset
Article is long unmaintained, so much so that a complete rewrite without references lasted for 10 months. Content is not distinct from the life social dynamics covered in the main article. There is probably room to merge this and content from that section (which is quite long) into one "Social impact of the industrial revolution" article. Sadads (talk) 22:26, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just because the Life in Great Britain during the Industrial Revolution article needs work is not a good reason to merge it here. Social topics should not be part of this article for a couple of reasons: 1) The Industrial Revolution was a technological and economic process and 2) Social issues are inherently political and that doesn't need to be in a history of technology article. AdvancedTechResearcher (talk) 20:42, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I completley agree, I think they are 2 different articles.
Oppose as per AdvancedTechResearcher. Life in Great Britain is a social topic, whereas the Industrial Revolution is a historical/technological topic. Furthermore, the Industrial Revolution concerns the whole globe, it's not exclusive to Great Britain. I oppose the merge and suggest that the two articles be kept separate. Wingwingwoom (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose i agree with the above oppositions, life in great britain during the industrial revolution covers more topics than need be discussed in the article concerning the industrial revolution itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.107.136.111 (talk) 16:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal is old and opposed. I removed the merge template banner from the article. – S. Rich (talk) 03:42, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2022
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The Criticisms section is very poorly written, with many grammatical errors and a sense of opinionated authorship. It is difficult for me to summarise all the proposed changes here. I have tried to provide some examples below, but a lot of this section and its subsections require proofreading, rewording, and substantiation.
Example: Original first paragraph
The Industrial revolution has been criticised for complete ecological collapse, causing mental illness, pollution and unnatural systems of organizing for humanity. Since the start of the industrial revolution people have criticised it by stating the Industrial Revolution turned humanity and nature into slaves and destroying the world. It has also been criticised by valuing profits and corporate growth over life and wellbeing, multiple movements have arose philosophically against the Industrial revolution and include groups such as the Amish and Primitivism.
Proposed Changes
Inconsistent capitalisation of 'Industrial Revolution'.
"complete ecological collapse" - The word 'complete' is redundant or inaccurate. This statement is not universally true; partial collapse can also occur.
"causing mental illness" - Elaboration or citation required. Caused to whom? On what scale?
"unnatural systems of organizing for humanity" - Poor grammar. What is this supposed to mean?
"Since the start of the industrial revolution people have criticised it by stating the Industrial Revolution turned humanity and nature into slaves and destroying the world." - Poor grammar; informal writing style; repetition of the sentiments of the first sentence. Which 'people' is this referring to? This sentence could be removed entirely.
"over life and wellbeing, multiple movements" - Should be two sentences, not comma-separated.
"have arose philosophically" - Should be 'arisen'. The word 'philosophically' should be moved to 'philosophical movements', or removed.
"and include groups" - Should be ', including groups'.
This is not a comprehensive list. The subsections after the one above also have similar issues.
Done First paragraph edited, feel free to offer more changes to subsequent paragraphs. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here's one in the caption for the picture of the dog eating trash:
"A dog forced to eat trash due to pollution, the Industrial Revolution has forced animals [...]"
Shouldn't that comma be either a period or a semicolon? Murphman03 (talk) 04:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What happen really when the world revolution happen
The marxist concept of overthrowing capitalism in all countries through the conscious revolutionary action of the organized working class. For theorists, these revolutions will not necessarily occur simultaneously,but where and when local conditions allows a revolutionary party to successfully replace bourgeois owership of the means of production.In most marxist schools, such as trotskyism and communist left,the essentially international charater of the class struggle and the socialism in one country.He observes that the first information revolution was the inveention of writing 5 or 6 thousand years,ago originally in Mesopotamia,the second was the invention of books(scrolls),originally in china as early as 1300 B. C., and thr third,Gutenberg's invention of the printing press and movable type between 1450 and 1455.We know little about the first two Revolution, the cost and price reductions and the speed and extent of its spread were at least as great as those of the present, the fourth information revolution. 2409:4040:418:52D2:4DDC:E16A:2E3D:1451 (talk) 15:09, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Glass Making
Why does the glass making section start with the sentence “ The glass was made in ancient Greece and Rome.” it makes no sense Coolcato (talk) 11:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.
Oppose. The first Industrial Revolution is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "Industrial Revolution". Pageview comparisons show that the first Industrial Revolution has by far the most trafficked page of any industrial revolution, and while its lead may be partly buoyed by holding the primary title, outgoing pageview stats suggest that very few readers end up here when trying to search for a different industrial revolution. "Industrial Revolution" alone is also the WP:COMMONNAME for the first Industrial Revolution, as indicated by the redirect pageviews, where the term "Industrial Revolution" gets 236 times as many daily pageviews as "First Industrial Revolution" does. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 19:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In everyday language and conversation "the industrial revolution" is known to mean the current topic of this article. That is a qualitative statement, but ModernDT above has provided quantitative evidence (and I'm sure there is plenty more if one were to look at search engine results, book phrase mentions etc.). So all I can say is that I would expect to come to this article and read on the exceptionally widely established historical revolution bearing this name, not on some more obscure (some might feel questionable) subsequent activities that have been labelled as such. I'd encourage pagemoves to consult with the likely views of the Man on the Clapham omnibus, that would enlighten the likelihood of helping versus confusing in such requests. SFC9394 (talk) 20:24, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above comments. Let's not redefine history. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. "Industrial Revolution" is the common and proper historical term for this era. Unburnable (talk) 01:56, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Clear primary topic and common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:26, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done First paragraph edited, feel free to offer more changes to subsequent paragraphs. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
