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.
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 Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization 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 see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization articles
Sources for the lead section and first two paragraphs[edit]
Hello, I was wondering if anyone had any credible sources for the lead section of this article as well as the first two paragraphs under the first section titled "Earliest expressions of the theory"? Thank you. Biancaromulo (talk) 08:13, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Awhile ago I added the citation for Gilman into this article, does it fit well with the piece as a whole? It is about Condorcet and his influence on economic and social development Andydettinger (talk) 06:41, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This appears to be a reflection on one or more authors' ideas about Modernization theory. Perhaps it could find a home in that article? Otherwise, perhaps it could be written to describe an established idea in (and not to synthesize a new idea from) literature in sociology. Cnilep (talk) 03:32, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In Wikipedia "essay like" means a lack of citations, which is not the case here. Rjensen (talk) 04:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In Wikipedia {{no footnotes}} or {{refimprove}} mean lack of citations; {{essay-like}} means "written like a personal reflection, personal essay, or argumentative essay that states a Wikipedia editor's personal feelings or presents an original argument about a topic." In my opinion, that is the case here. You may, of course, disagree, but in principle you should not remove maintenance templates until the issue is remedied. If there is general consensus that this article has no problems, that is fine. If it is just the two of us disagreeing, though, there may be more work to be done. Cnilep (talk) 05:21, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
please specify what are the original ideas included in the article that are not connected with published scholars who originated them? Rjensen (talk) 19:52, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
