Talk:World History

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/World_History:An_Age_of_Empires_-_Rome%2C_Han_China%2C_and_the_Silk_Road has been split into two different chapters (The Roman Empire needs it's own chapter for sure) but the links are now broken. Planned Stages of Development
 * 1) Humble Beginnings- Intial exploratory action and structural plans Accomplished
 * 2) Operation: Blank Check- Finalization of structure and basic articles- See The Rise of Dictatorship and Totalitarianism for an example of the type of article completeness desired Current
 * 3) Exapand-a-lot- Addition of information concerning cultural, artistic, architectural, and societal conditions/achievements for cultures, especially noting the interactions between them, pointing out little known phenomen (i.e. North-South trade patterns are often ignored versus the ever-prevalent East-West trade)
 * 4) It's a fixer-upper- Error-proofing, addition of multiple-choice review to each article and to the entire project, addition of material and accuracy checking
 * 5) The Home Stretch- Final accuaracy checking, error-proofing, etc.
 * 6) Exit Stage-Left- The completion of the project and advertising- contacting AP World History teachers, the College Board, etc. and turning the project into a regular source of information to students, teachers, and interested persons

Old talk (pre-Standard change)

Oh what fun, I've now added a section the Weimar Republic (it seems appropriate here) tomorrow I'll spruce up ol' Mussolini and finish up Hitler. Then on to World War II! Oh, I think I'll tackle some ancient history tomorrow as well. But where to put the Great Depression? I guess it's own article is the way to go. And since I'm the only big contributor for a month...I am kind of giving myself free reign to take the reins (inline assonance intentional :-) of power for the time being. I think however, I will begin to aim for AP World History standards (I achieved a 5, so I will call myself well-qualified for the task) rather than the very regional California standards (although they provide an excellent baseline) I will give a week's notice before I unilaterally make the standards change. Please comment--Naryathegreat 04:13, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

So what'd I get done today? Let's see, I redid much of the structure of the historical contents page and moved some pages around. I added potential sections. I added info on the AP World History Standard. I added a disclaimers page and a Golden Rule, to help keep us on track. As soon as the Standard change is official, I'm taking the California standards out of the articles and will probably replace them with the appropriate AP World History Standard material. I redid ol' Mussolini and made the Maya something to be proud of, as well as restructuring the Precolumbian page. It now takes into account all the cultures likely you'll want to know about. You personally probably haven't heard of them, and I've got some more, if we get to that eventuality. I created World History 101, a clever introduction and explanation that should help streamline the process of getting FAQs out of the way. I mean it about rapid progression over the next month. I beleive by that time it will be at least half finished, and worthy of an "orange" two-block recognition. You deserve commendation for putting the project into place and giving it some initial vitality. But now, it's time to get moving, abandon the regional standard, and I pray, make it a good enough page that I'm not just always talking to thin air.--Naryathegreat 23:51, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Okay, well, I'm back after my extended leave of abscence for personal reasons. Actually I've been back for a while but I just haven't done major edits. I added a large amount to the Roman Republic part of that article and I plan to add some more to other parts over the next few weeks. A few people have shown actual interest in helping now so I hope this project becomes further advanced. Thanks for you interst in our project if you're reading this! Also, I choose to stay with the AP World History Standard for now because whoever it was that was upset a few months back never turned up again or spoke to me personally so...Anwyway, if you want to help and don't know where to start, then drop me a line and I'll give you some starting places. We don't just need contributors-- we need proofreaders and reviewers too (reviewers check for consistency and smooth transition of ideas, all that sort of thing). I'd love your help!--Naryathegreat

Naming convention
Hi, I assembled the Top active list of Wikibooks. Unfortunately, World History does not follow any naming convention, so the contributions can not be attributed easily to a book. If somebody is still working on this book, please consider a consistent naming convention, so that all pages belonging to World History can be recognized by a computer script.

It is up to you to choose either World History World History:Ancient Civilizations

or the more modern version (since subpages have been activated on Wikibooks recently) World History World History/Ancient Civilizations

(subpages give additional navigational advantages, e.g. an automatic link to the parent page, etc.)

Logged in users can easily move pages by the "move" command. Thanks! --Andreas 06:09, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Frustration
I'm dissapointed. A WikiProject entitled WORLD history turns out to be exclusivley HUMAN history. Were this a fair and balanced representation of the history of our species, I'd be satisfied. However, this project is culturally-one sided.

This project dismisses the first 99.5% of human history in 1 'chapter', less than 20 sentances. This summary effectivley throws out the overwhelming majority of the history of our species as trash: not worth writing about, not worth reading about, not worth learning about. More or less, this project makes this point:

"Around 10,000 years ago agriculture... effectivly started civilization and the begining of the nation-state."

Which implies:

"Nothing worthwhile happened until agriculture was developed 10,000 years ago"

and

"The initial 99% of the history of our species was spent building UP to our civilized state."

Honestley.

The 'history' book you are writing has been written before, in every text book across the globe. This in an opportunity to BREAK THE MOLD, and write a history of our species that does not dismiss "prehistory" as worthless. You guys are throwing this opportunity away.


 * Don't view this as the 'final essay'. If you have information to add--add it!  Wiki projects like this are ongoing and information is only available as people add it.  Obviously, there is an overwhelming amount of data that needs to be added.  So contact whatever history experts you know and have them insert the missing data!  Don't complain about it--fix it. That's what Wiki is all about.


 * To add on - If you honestly feel the need to have a difference in perspective, it would be beneficial to all for you to include it within the book's framework (or as a totally new wikibook). However, the standards that wikibooks should aspire to should still be maintained, especially with regards to facuality and NPOV.I do not believe the original author(s) intended this to be a totally biased POV article; it's just that, humans have only seen history from our own POV, and even then records of ancient times have been badly maintained if at all. Certainly if you have insights to the areas you mentioned, I believe wikibooks will welcome your contributions (within reasons, of course). Lynx7725 17:19, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * If you want anthropology, write and anthropology book. Don't get your shorts in a wad because you can't change definitions to suit your prejudices.  History is a record of HUMAN events, particularly human WRITTEN events. we need to make this like the U.S. history book


 * Isn't this supposed to be a HISTORY book? Pre-history is not history at all, and the first chapter really should be scrapped. It might be ok in a Science book, or anthropology, or mythology, or something--but the fact remains it's really not history! It can't be history unless we have written records.--Linesdata 17:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

First chapter on China started
I'm new to editing Wikibooks, but after reading some of them - specifically this one - and noticing missing content, I decided to do some personal research. As a result, I typed up "The Mythical Period" in Chapter 5: The First Chinese Dynasties. I'm not sure if it conforms to AP standards, but I hope it fits well. Thanks!

--Ccny930

Christian first chapter
How about having an optional first chapter that has origins from a Christian perspective, so that this can be developed as homeschoole friendly, and the instructor can choose which chapter to use.?

All Wiki's are written from a non buyist perspective and therefore the most scientific perspective (except for the buyist wikis of course) It would be extremely inappropiate to write a christian point of view because the bible states that the Earth is only  about 5000 years old. your best bet would be to come up with your own first chapter, skip it, or use an entirely different source of information.

I believe I can speak for a great number of people who would also find it totally unacceptable to write any history from a specifically Christian perspective. Does "homeschoole(sic)friendly" mean that children who are homeschooled are mostly being taught history, and other subjects, from a "Christian perspective?" Does this mean they are being sheltered from "non-Christian" education in public schools? If this is the case, I don't think you are going to find a great deal of "creationist" literature or other media on Wikibooks in Wikimedia, unless it is to explain creationism. I'm sure Wiki-people come from all backgrounds, but I believe we all agree that the scientific method is one construct of reality from which learning materials in "academic" topics are best oriented. Of course, I am not saying that religious topics should or would be kept out of Wikibooks or Wikimedia at all.

Brazil content
Brazilian History page up for deletion can you use it in this project? ChessCreator (talk) 16:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Some remarks regarding structure of project
I notice that material regarding early chinese dynasties is duplicated in Ancient Civilisations and The First Chinese dynasties. Also the structure of Ancient Civilisations could do with some tidying up; The Hittites,Kassites and Assyrians should be moved into the Mesopotamian section as there is a clear linear sequence between these civilisations and events in southern Mesopotamia. Besides, should the Kassites be seen as an independent civilisation.

Material regarding the Persians should be moved from the Ancient Civilisations section and moved to the Greek Section where it is contemporaneous, (also alter the title of the Greek section as well to include Persians). The Persians signify the end of Mesopotamian dominance and therefore should not be included in that section, they are not as ancient as the New Babylonians.

I would like to contribute to this project but until the overall structure is decided upon, I don't know whether my work is duplicated or not, or whether it will be eventually deleted. I read a chapter on Mesopotamian history and made copious notes on the Amorites,Kassites,Hittites and Assyrians without realising the text had information on them at the end of the Ancient Civilisations section. I might add something at another time.

I hesitate on making the changes myself without some discussion beforehand.

Also see my remarks in the talk page of Ancient Civilisations.

Zfishwiki (talk) 18:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

anyone still here
if no one else seems to be active I have some big ideas which involve moving/creating/combing chapters and other large structural changes. I received a five on the AP exam myself and know a few of its secrets.

If their is no opposition I propose a new table of contents that i believe better fits AP standards and flows better
 * 1) Ancient civilizations
 * 2) Migrations and complications
 * 3) The Axial Age
 * 4) Greece and Persia
 * 5) Rome
 * 6) Classical Asia
 * 7) Islam
 * 8) Darkness in Europe
 * 9) The golden age of Asia
 * 10) Hemispheric interaction
 * 11) Mongols and aftermath
 * 12) The ancient Americas
 * 13) Empires of Gunpowder
 * 14) Global transformation: Early modern interactions
 * 15) The European transformation
 * 16) The Russian emergence
 * 17) Asia and Africa in transition
 * 18) The enlightenment  and revolution
 * 19) The revolution of everyday life, the industrial revolution
 * 20) The European world order
 * 21) The Japanese reaction
 * 22) Into the trench: World War one
 * 23) Depression and dictators
 * 24) The War of the world
 * 25) The cold war
 * 26) Latin America
 * 27) The African emergence
 * 28) The New Asia
 * 29) Globalization

Plagiarism
I was suspicious that large amounts of this were not original content I am right, copying and pasting random paragraphs of this book into google I found that most of them were cut and paste out of other books and never did a see a citation, therefore the majority of this book should be removed for copyright violations it seems.

Format of textbook
The entire format of the textbook is probably outdated and it doesn't match the 2016 AP World History course format. For example,other then Egypt, most of Africa doesn't play a big role in ancient river valley civilizations. The AP exam focuses much more on the Indus, Chinese, Egypt and Mesopotamia civilizations. But there is still an entire section about the African continent that was in the beginning of the textbook. So I will try to rearrange the sections to make it unanimous with the AP World History course format.RenaissanceMan2144 (discuss • contribs) 03:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)