Contents

Talk:Government

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Government article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 60 days

This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of May 2, 2007.

This  level-2 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Sociology Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Top‑importance 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Philosophy: Social and political Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Social and political philosophy History Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other talk page banners

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 25 January 2011. Further details are available here. This article was selected as the article for improvement on 7 November 2022 for a period of one week. This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. Discussions: Moved, June 2016, from GovernmenttoForms of government, see discussion. Moved, September 2017, from Forms of governmenttoGovernment, see discussion.

Suggestion to delete this map. There's no mention anywhere else in the article of "flawed democracies", "hybrid regimes" or "authoritarian regimes", so the map is presented without useful context. Labeling countries as authoritarian without further explanation may also violate NPOV. Lastly, the map has not been kept up to date for the past five years. BismuthRainbow (talk) 16:43, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of constitution 1a : the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it.

Unconstitutional the opposite Antonyms & Near Antonyms for unconstitutional. lawful, legal, legit.

Conclusion from above definitions.

A.Unconstitutional(Inhumanity)

unlawful,illegal,illicit.

Opposite constitutional definition

Capital,

Private,

Personal/Individual .

B.Constitutional(Humanity)

lawful, legal, licit.

By constitutional definition

Social,

Government,

Public/Peoples .

Antonyms are not same as synonyms.Private and government are two different sectors and are not same upon meaning and constitutional view.

Definitions -

A group is a number of persons or things that are located, gathered, or classed together.

A community is an individual unit (a group of living things) with commonality such as place, norms, religion, values, customs, or identity.

Conclusion from above definitions.

"Community" consisting of "Group" are both a set of individuals/personals that opposes constitution to be unconstitutional.

Incorrect definition-

"Government is the system or group of people governing an organized community, often a state."

Above quotation consists of "group" and "community" shows personal/individual which defines unconstitutional and it is a social misbehaviour. These words are spoiling the definition of government.

Capitalization/Privatization is the evidence of inhumanity in being inhuman on earth.

Correct definition-

"Government is the system of people governing often a state." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.15.152.170 (talk) 14:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noor. 1122. 11975 178.130.254.37 (talk) 09:51, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know you live in saudi arabia i will hunt you down Ahfreddy (talk) 18:26, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://school.eb.com/levels/high/article/government/106262  AltoStev (talk) 12:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed not anywhere published and not sourced "National governments which self-identify as democracies" status map as it belongs for more into topic detailed page democracy where already is. This is one general overview article, and the only POV pushing view would be to keep that map considering to some of the most autocratic regimes claim democratic form of government but no one of experts, or media and so on take that as something serious or even partial true. Nubia86 (talk) 23:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Nubia86: The other map uses data from a US-government funded American think tank and so isn't unbiased; having only that map by itself pushes its POV. Having it next a map of countries that self-identify as democracy provides a alternative view. I'd agree that keeping only the map for self-identification would push a POV, but having both next to each other allows the reader to compare them and come to their own conclusions. If anything, having both next to each other makes the point that self-identification isn't always trustworthy much clearer because readers don't necessarily have previous knowledge about which countries self-identify as democracies, so seeing the Freedom in the World survery map by itself without anything to compare it to would not illustrate how self-identification can be unreliable.

Keeping both maps improves neutrality and is more informative for the reader than either map would be by itself. – Scyrme (talk) 17:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right, I will restore that map. Nubia86 (talk) 17:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. – Scyrme (talk) 17:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On the map the limited recognized area of Georgia known as Abkhazia is colored in blue to signify a presidential republic but there’s an orange dot to signify a parliamentary republic. Which is it? The Wikipedia article for Abkhazia says it’s a unitary presidential republic not a parliamentary republic. 69.204.59.102 (talk) 20:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While circles/dots are used for very small territories elsewhere on the map, one is not used for Abkhazia and in-fact no dot is present in the region of the Caucasus. Georgia is orange, and Abkhazia is blue. Where are you seeing an orange dot? – Scyrme (talk) 20:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The orange dot is over Abkhazia which itself is blue. I’m not sure why there is an orange dot. 69.204.59.102 (talk) 23:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean now. That "dot" isn't like all the others; it's smaller and doesn't have a border. Strangely if you go to file's page on Wikicommons and click to view the "current" version listed under the file history that spot isn't there, but it is there on the version displayed at the top of the page. It might be something to do with the conversion between .svg and .png; the version displayed at the top of the page is a .png while the version you get when you access the "current" version from the file history is the original .svg file. – Scyrme (talk) 00:27, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Clyde H. Mapping: You uploaded several versions of this file, including the current version. Do you have any idea what might be going on here? – Scyrme (talk) 00:37, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is likely an oversight stemming from the file's XML code which I have since corrected. However, I noticed a similar issue with Artsakh (incorrectly displayed as semi-presidential in the preview) which I was unable to resolve. Clyde H. Mapping (talk) 21:04, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]