Talk:Diplomacy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	To-do list for Diplomacy:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
Improve this previous CotW article to featured-standard so that it can be nominated and featured. Expand article and expand details about the diplomatic process and general diplomacy itself. Add more information on types of diplomacy and how diplomacy is used. Copyedit article; clean up grammar, get rid of repeat wikilinks and wording inconsistencies, make article flow better.
Priority 1 (top)

A Wikipedian removed Diplomacy from the good article list. There are suggestions below for improving areas to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, renominate the article as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review. Removal date: No date specified. Please edit template call function as follows: {{DelistedGA|insert date in any format here}}

WikiProject Echo has identified Diplomacy as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Hebrew language Wikipedia.

Diplomacy was the collaboration of the week for the week starting on August 22, 2004. For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations.

This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Contents 1 Diplomacy (game) 2 What, no discussion? 3 World Peace? questionable 4 Sealand 5 Definition of Diplomacy 6 ambassadors' ranks - strange sentence... 7 Missing word? 8 Non-western Diplomacy? 9 Delisted GA 10 Diplomatic Theory? 11 Merge from Legation? 12 Diplomatic recognition of the Netherlands 13 POV Section "Diplomats as a guarantee"

[edit] Diplomacy (game)

Moved the initial entry about the board game to Diplomacy (game). I think it would startle most users of an encyclopedia to find a board game description as the primary entry. :) Of course, now the primary entry needs to be written - what's there is just a stub. -- April

That makes sense. I was just experimenting with creating an article, and had no idea where it would land. Now I have changed the link from the board game page too. My question is whether there is a general policy of putting the non-trademarked word as the primary entry. For example to scrabble means to scramble or clamber, but maybe most people who look up Scrabble are thinking of the crossword game.

Thanks for helping me out. This whole concept is sooooo cool. -Karl

Welcome, Karl! The Wikipedia naming conventions suggest the most common use should be the "primary" entry, but there are sometimes disagreements as to what that should be. In case of serious confusion, disambiguating pages are used. Hope to see you around! -- April

excellent article, the resources are excellent! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.82.192.209 (talk) 23:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] What, no discussion?

The article of the week, and no one's talking? For shame. Well, I'll start the chat by saying that I'd like to work in public diplomacy somewhere. I'm not sure the actual word is used outside the U.S., but it's a useful concept and it's something many governments do. Isomorphic 14:37, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] World Peace? questionable

"Once concerned most prominently with...questions of war and peace, diplomacy now concerns itself more with issues of trade and culture."

I challenge the accuracy of this statement. If there's no convincing evidence to back this up then it'll be removed. Comments?

This is true for the vast majority of countries, but perhaps not for the United States. - SimonP 14:15, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)

Surely nearly every country in the world has had diplomatic activity related to war recently, not just the US (Western countries (whether to be a member of the 'coalition'), middle east countries, countless African countries etc etc?? I think original statement is naive. (original comment above is mine, forgot to sign) -- AdamH 15:21, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Haven't trade and culture always been a subject of diplomacy? Maybe not as much as today, but it was an issue. I also disagree with the SimonP's implication that U.S. diplomacy today isn't concerned with trade - after all, there are those who say that the U.S. primarilly chooses its wars with economic interests in mind. Isomorphic 01:10, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'll replace "Once concerned most prominently with...questions of war and peace, diplomacy now concerns itself more with issues of trade and culture." with something like "Diplomacy, international or otherwise, concerns itself with a whole manner of topics, including war and trade." I suppose it's just the tone of the original statement. I don't like how it implies how war is no longer a diplomatic issue, which it clearly is. I mean, from the earliest cavemen, bartering a rock-hammer or something for a piece of bone, that's diplomacy involving trade right? And right now we have the US involved diplomatically with Iran over nuclear concerns, which is diplomacy concerned with war? I just can't see how that original statement stands up. I haven't had any replies disagreeing so I'll change the article. Incidentally I agree with most of Isomorphic's comment. AdamH 15:49, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Sealand

I don't think Sealand is a good example of an unrecognized country. Much better examples are Abkhazia, Somaliland, Puntland, or Transnistria. These are full-size de facto states that do not have diplomatic recognition. Isomorphic 14:52, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I strongly feel Sealand makes for a better pull-quote/caption and image, though. It also may be slightly more well-known to a section of the readership. Undoubtably your examples (plus more) make for better text within the section- I simply don't know of as many unrecognized countries. --Rossumcapek 18:08, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Definition of Diplomacy

I once saw a poster which read, "Diplomacy is the ability to tell someone to go to hell and have them look forward to the trip." H2O 23:35, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Will Rogers: "Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock."

Ambrose Bierce's Devil's Dicitonary defines diplomacy as "The patriotic art of lying for one's country."

--Rossumcapek 17:44, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] ambassadors' ranks - strange sentence...

I changed the following sentence: "States were normally ranked by the title of the sovereign, for Catholic nations the emissary from the Vatican was paramount, those from the kingdoms, then duchies and principalities and republics were considered the lowest of the low" to this: "States were normally ranked by the title of the sovereign; for Catholic nations the emissary from the Vatican was paramount, then those from the kingdoms, and duchies, principalities and republics were considered the lowest of the low."

I'm not sure if I preserved the original meaning, but the old sentence was very hard to understand.

saturnight 16:17, Aug 27, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Missing word?

"Even in smaller posting ambassadors were very expensive."

There ought to be a word between 'smaller' and 'posting', but I'm not entirely sure what word was intended when this was written. Anyone have any idea? ---J. Passepartout

I think it's "smaller posts." Chart123 20:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Non-western Diplomacy?

Very little on non-western diplomacy here. Mongols, and that's pretty much it. Anything about diplomacy in the Ancient Chinese empires? Japan, Korea? What about among the Caliphates? Is this just a modern phenomenon? If so, should there be something about this?

Chart123 20:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

There most definitely should be more. Though the "Diplomats as a guarantee" section also has some description of non-western practices.- SimonP 23:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delisted GA

This article did not go through the standard GA nomination process. In reviewing the article as is, there is a serious lack of citations of sources (see criterion 2b). Concerning prose, some assertions are made which use weasel words which should corrected and cited, for example: "Modern diplomacy's origins are often traced to the states of Northern Italy". "Diplomacy was a complex affair, even more so than now" sounds like an opinion and requires a citation or and a rewording.

In regards to coverage, the history section is rather Europe-centric. One could just brush it aside with the statement that the rest of the world were not interested in diplomacy, but that would not be quite correct. China at times in its history did send diplomats abroad.

The lead section should be a summary of the article. Currently the lead is in fact a section in itself. The portions that introduce new information should be part of the main sections and only a standalone summary should be included in the lead.

Please correct these items before renominating the article. RelHistBuff 11:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

The Europeans more or less shaped and crafted modern diplomacy to what it is today so of course it's going to be more "Europe-centric". China sent out diplomatic missions but not as extensive as the Euro nations during their craze for colonies and constant warring with one another a few centures ago. Shadowrun 06:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Diplomatic Theory?

Shouldn't there be a section within the article that at the very least links to the most common schools of diplomatic thought: Realism, Rationalism, Liberalism, etc.?--A Parallax View 18:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from Legation?

Oppose merge. -- Petri Krohn 17:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Diplomatic recognition of the Netherlands

In the section on diplomatic recognition the Kingdom of the Netherlands was mentioned as a country that was not recognised by even its closest allies for decades after independence. This situation however pertains to the Dutch Republic, the predescessor state of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. I changed this.Gerard von Hebel 21:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV Section "Diplomats as a guarantee"

This section appears to be a POV excuse for Iranian behavior and should be removed. It has no basis in diplomatic law, and certainly, the Islamic Republic regime was no shining example of honest diplomacy.Scott Adler 06:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. The Iranian action was a gross breach of diplomatic norms and is recognized as such by essentially everyone besides Iran. Mgunn 07:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks like this was added by SimonP back in 24 September 2004. If someone wanted to they could see if he had any resource for this by asking on his talk page. (PsychoSmith 21:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC))

If you want to read about the development of diplomatic immunity, and its divergence from the diplomatic norms established in the Middle East, a good source is The Rise of the Great Powers: 1648-1815 by Derek McKay and H.M. Scott. Specifically see pg. 202 to 204. Most of the history in this article is based on that book. It used to be listed as a reference for the article, but has for some reason disappeared. - SimonP 22:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)