Talk:Technocracy Incorporated

2101:

means page 32 because I can't access page 28. If somebody can point me to something of value please let me know. If it is to be included then there should be a counter point as FidelDrumbo has done. However, I still think it should be not be presented because it specifically talks about the movement in the statement, and again, this is about the organization. I don't see any reason to include information about the movement, when it already has its own article, to the organization itself. It muddles things up and confuses the reader. It is basically indirectly calling the organization fascists, and because of it, lost appeal as a movement. Which is pretty strange to present on an article about an organization not a movement. Do other Knowledge articles have criticisms of organizations supported by others opinions? I'm pretty sure that answer is no.

1171:

Alliance. The Alliance conducted an industrial survey of North America in which economic parameters were measured in energy units rather than dollars. Although the Alliance lasted only a few years, the Depression provided fertile ground for the re-emergence of the technocratic movement which used depressed economic conditions as a rallying point for their call for a complete overhaul of existing economic and political institutions. In 1921, Howard Scott and others formed Technocracy, Inc., and in conjunction with the Industrial Engineering Department at Columbia University, began an empirical analysis of production and employment in North America in energy units. The association with a prestigious university like Columbia combined with Scott’s flamboyant relationship with the press made Technocracy internationally famous.

692:, given the controversies we've seen, it makes sense to talk about specific groups rather than a general, "fuzzy", "movement". Concentrate first on bringing the pre-WWII stuff up to scratch, first the history and then the basic concepts as developed by Scott et al before the war. Then you can have two sections, one on how the ideas of TI developed post-WWII, and another about "legacy" or "influence" that can describe specific groups that share similar ideas. If those groups deserve more than a few lines, then it's probably best to start a new article for them. But of course, you need to remember 1342:

under the leadership of Howard Scott. A personality cult was built up around Scott. However, discontent with Scott’s leadership lead to a split in the movement during the 1940s. The resulting break away group soon failed. Technocracy Inc. organised a large demonstration in 1947 but its membership began to decline. Scott remained as it leader and chief engineer until his death in 1970. The organisation still exists today and has its HQ in Ferndale, WA, USA.

1242:"Against democracy" is not a buzzphrase, nor is it inflammatory (but it is indeed incorrect). On the other hand, proselytizing about the imminent menaces of "Peak Oil and Global Warming" (neither of which are proper nouns), and claiming to have a "unique" and "original concept" about this "'Plan B'", are unacceptable unless they are attributed and sourced and placed in the proper context. (So much for "enough sources". Pick up an 669:

is a blatant conflict of interest for an editor here who is directing web traffic to self published articles en.technocracynet.eu/index.php Network of European Technocrats - News. www.lulu.com/content/750510 Technocracy: Building a new sustainable society for a post carbon world by Andrew Wallace (Book) in Engineering ---- This is another sales site set up by Dr. Andrew Wallace, Isenhand or Technocrate here to promote his book.

1915: 1922: 325: 516: 2080:

doesn't give any reason why or any evidence in support of this kind of claim against an organization. I've looked over many articles on the web recently on Technocracy from newspaper archives to their own information, and there's no evidence or claim of fascism. In fact, much of the stuff I come across claim to be non political and in some instances patriotic as is seen in this newspaper article on page seven.

356: 1135:

thing as being against the core principles of democracy (democracy vs constitutional democracy), the concept being to create a system to provide for the "needs" of the people and I believe still follows the two main principles of democracy "The first principle is that all members of the society have equal access to power and the second that all members enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties" (

1617:

particularly proposes it. You have left out the most basic aspects... energy accounting... this is the basis of the idea they have and thermoeconomics... and an administration or scientific social design. This is the very basis. Please do a little more research... On the plus side the beginning is more focused now. So that is good. Rewrite what you advocate below as an edit... and we can edit further.

442: 424: 452: 2313:

you would remove sources like a government website that made the information more interesting. As the other editor stated... Knowledge has a crummy reputation and I see why. Maybe you are a fine editor, but on this subject seem to be having fun removing all the information including now a government website with lots of info. Ugh! --Fidel Drumbo 16:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

190: 271: 218: 1196:

it surfaces with the ecological movement since the 60's, while emphasizing the erroneous use of planet's resources. An indirect consequence of this idea is the analysis of industrial processes by net energy use, taking into account all the energy involved since the extraction of natural resources and the "primary" energy. This approach is gaining adepts.

1260:

describe it"... there should be a lot more third-party sources, like news articles, historical documents etc. on which to reference details of the organization itself. Currently nearly half (I count about 8) of the citations in the article are affiliated with the organization itself. (Even if statements are cited, they must be attributed to

1975:

statements presented in the books and false information. Really weird and strange to say the least. The books you provide have some great information, but some of it is wrong and should be carefully included in the article. I have reworded and reinserted the disputed material as well as updated the references to meet Knowledge standards.

1961: 2338:

Johnfos, It would be more constructive if you didn't delete so much material without a discussion on it. The Social Security Administrations government website information along with the another reference written by Raymond Frogner of University of Alberta and the New Scientist article contain pretty

2312:

of the New Science article? Lots of information backs up that information, so why restore the wrong information? My guess is that you are a 'civil pov pusher' and no doubt will hang on here making the same edits over and over, so have fun. Interesting things on Knowledge but its a shame Johnphos that

2079:

I don't understand your point Johnfos, if there was one. I would appreciate a more concise rebuttal before reverting a meaningful edit. What fascists implications was it talking about? That is a pretty clear aspect that needs to be discussed and addressed since it is clearly stated in the article yet

2046:

I think also that is too heavy handed and does read like opinion, and is not backed up or is easily misconstrued or seems smear like since no actual reason beyond wearing a uniform is given or saluting. Is the BoyScouts fascistic then? It unbalanced. It needs some counterpoint since the group says in

2004:

Technocracy Inc. officials wore a uniform, consisting of a "well-tailored double-breasted suit, gray shirt, and blue necktie, with a monad insignia on the lapel", and its members saluted Scott in public. Beverly Burris has suggested that an elitist or possibly fascist implication of actions connected

1854:

I think you are perhaps tag over enthusiastic. Instead of trying to negatively phrase your concerns of an article that has been around for years by a notable group... why not improve the article.?..which you have not done... make changes to effect the issues you have. You are not actively editing the

1603:

I guess I will not be taking you seriously any more until you present better, more informed information. What has this to do with any thing? What are you talking about? Pretty obvious you know nothing in terms of what that groups focus is. They do not propose world domination my friend. North America

1214:

etc... that it is almost like a purposeful inflammation (although your intention may not be that) or your own personal critique, instead of simply going neutral in presenting information. The area... is not Canada and the U.S. by the way... it is North America. I could go on.... They claim they are a

1195:

Explicitly, a similar idea occurred to Frederick Soddy in 1922. He wrote that the price of a merchandise reflect, directly or not, the energy invested in its production. (Today, he would say available energy). The same idea was proposed by Howard Scott during the Great Depression of the 30's. And now

1134:

I believe in its current form the lead section is somewhat misleading specifically the democratic part of "disdains politics (including democracy and voting) as corrupt.." while is technically against current democratic voting systems for choosing people to run/administer things, that is not the same

1943:

This article is about an organization, and that organization has a website that publishes information related to themselves. So, it is important to include information from them to further explain the purposes of the group and their history as a movement. Other third party sources should be included

1189:

For that we should reach a consensus about value, by weighting advisedly all the variables. Some idea like that certainly has occurred as soon the Law of Conservation of Energy was established in 1870. I cannot perform a thorough search, but I would suggest a starting point in the writings of Stuart

1157:

First, Firebladed I think your ideas above are essentially correct and have gone to the former version of the article. Jafet... These descriptions that you do not like the sound of, is the way the organization describes itself. It is also the way others describe it. It has information in the article

2100:

Also, who is Beverly Burris? Is this person some notable person or authority that warrants inclusion of this claim? Not really because this person 'suggests' it and there are no references or facts to make such a claim in the book. The wiki reference says it's on page 28. I assume its a mistake and

1638:

I don't pretend to be particularly knowledgeable about this subject, but what you have said about it and some personal research of mine so far makes it appear to be an irrelevant fringe group to me, instead of a mainstream organization that does not have to resort to buzzword marketing and imminent

1259:

This article can do better than just quoting buzzwords and promotion from the website word for word. We should describe what the organization is in plain language. Quotes from the group can only be used to show that the group said such a thing. You raise another important point with "the way others

865:

If you believe that is true then why not Afd the Technocracy movement article? Seriously. Do you want to merge this TechInc article with Technocracy movement or Technocracy movement with TechInc? Right now your tags are contradictory. It may make sense to merge the Technocracy movement article here

831:

The period from the late 19th cent. and the inception of Technocracy Incorporated (TechInc.) along with the other attempts by various people to start related social movements (TechMovement) is now pretty well covered in depth and cited and referenced in the Technocracy movement article... so now it

668:

Andrew Alexander Wallace This book promotes the idea that his group of which he is the director (Network of European Technocrats) is a part of the Technocracy movement. Technocracy Incorporated states over and over that it is not associated with any other groups in the U.S. or in Europe. This then

1683:

also is not a fringe group. Also no... not any predictions were made... where you read that... is unknown but not factual. As far as layout and format... your help is appreciated. The article has been improved. Thank you. If you wish to get more good information as to this topic... and a good over

1616:

as you say. It proposes a Technate... not a Technocracy. That words has gotten multiple definitions since 1934 when they used it. Technocracy is the name of a group.... that proposes a Technate (the one in the last two design chapters of the Technocracy Study Course). Technocracy Incorporated more

1219:

construct... and they are referenced that way by others not involved. Also putting the tags on the article that you did use... really does not connect with this now highly cited and referenced article. 6 months ago... it would have been true.. but the article has added multiple sourced references.

1201:

Thermodynamic and economic optima do not coincide, except in very few cases. Berry et al. have shown that the two optima do coincide in the case of a free market in which the only "scarce" resource is available energy (or utilizable work). That means that labor, capital, inputs, etc. should all be

2342:

This is very very peculiar behavior especially coming from a person who has contributed on Knowledge for such a long time. I think after the information you have presented on the Administrators noticeboard, you really have a personal vendetta against another editor who may have been a Technocracy

1718:

that "...Technocracy Incorporated and its program.. is perhaps the most important social movement of the 20th. century in my opinion... it influenced and continues to influence many... and was the fastest growing social movement of the early to mid 1930's." skip sievert (talk) 14:51, 6 April 2008

1384:

of the article and nothing else. The referenced article uses a dispassionate tone and concise language. The current Knowledge article reads like a promotion of the organization in many places, using its own words, linking to its own material, and including details not shown to be relevant (like a

1341:

The organisation was form in 1933 from former members of the Technical Alliance, including Howard Scott and Dr. M. King Hubbert. The organisation was one of a number of technocratic organisation to form in 1933 such as the Continental Congress. The organisation was at its height during the 1930s

2235:

is basically contentionious and pointless as part of this debate. Please stop personalizing this and get the facts straight. It is their official site and they are a non profit group and the source can be used to explain their position or be quoted from as in other articles do on Knowledge! Also

1349:

as you say above, is how they describe themselves and others describe them. The article is about them. Lets stop talking about buzz's please and stick with the information. This is what TechInc is and does. The wiki article you are quoting is completely unsourced. It is pretty awful. Also... the

2148:

The criticisms were not well sourced and over the top. Plus some of them were completely irrelevant to the group. For example the "fascistic" implications provided by some of your edits mentioned not one word of the group Technocracy Inc. It stated "some actions within the movement may have had

1974:

I would tend to believe information coming from Howard Scotts organization and a notable New Scientist article than non notable published books. Also, some of the books you provide are pretty badly written and chronologically a real headache to get through. Also throw in the various derogatory

1772:

But where is the actual evidence that TI has been so important and influential in a wider sense? Perhaps there are some New York Times articles and scholarly books by disinterested historians about TI? Many more third party publications about TI are needed to support what is being said in this

1170:

The use of energy as a unifying concept for social, political and economic analysis reached a zenith with the technocratic movement in the USA and Canada during the 1930s. Led by the flamboyant and energetic Howard Scott, the Technocracy movement began in 1918 as a group called the Technical

2197:

Buris didn't use the term "fascistic" but she did refer to a "possibly fascist implication", which doesn't sound "over the top" to me. In terms of relevancy, her material related to the previous sentence which said: "Technocracy Inc. officials wore a uniform, consisting of a 'well-tailored

720:

Removing links to expanded information.. and only preserving links and information to certain sources such as Network of European Technocrats narrows things down to.. in my opinion.. information that is contrived to get people to end up on that particular Network of European Technocrats

1472:, are structurally incapable of taking effective action. Technocracy technate design, is the possible 'Plan B,' according to them, for enabling a continuance of the technology, that will ensure our survival. Technocracy Incorporated proposes a non political governmental system using 1726:

articles and scholarly books by disinterested historians about TI? Many more third party publications are needed to support what is being said in this article. Sources close to the subject are not very helpful and I've tagged the TI Publications section as being an advertisement.

1956:). Then because of publicity and many people claiming to speak of behalf of "Technocracy" they incorporated in order to protect their material and assume responsibility of their real claims instead of the misinterpretation and misinformation that had arisen during that time.(e.g. 823:

The Technocracy movement article gets into the precedent cultural/scientific culture from the 19th century and the early 20th century and gets into how all those things combined to produce what we know as the Technocracy movement in the 1918 to 1934 period that is still around.

1877:

Attempts have been made to introduce the following material into the front end of several articles. I've moved the paragraph here because it introduces some material that in part seems to be straight copy from a self-published source. The content is also incorrect because the

1691:

There are a bunch of articles on wiki that I do not particularly like or agree with... but edit any way for various reasons. Thanks for contributing your ideas and please continue. My comments are only directed toward making things as far as possible neutral and full of info.

2272:

I have removed the disputed Burris material, and material based on unreliable sources such as surepost.com. The New Scientist source is reliable but what it says about the Technical Alliance conflicts with some other sources, so we need to discuss how to best incorporate it.

633:

I fail to see a substantial difference between the two articles. Furthermore, the fuzzy line between them only confuses readers. You even have a picture of the Technocracy Incorporated sign as the first image. Let's clean everything up (again) and cite some bloody sources.

374: 961:

Thanks Fireblade... I was just about to move the company box up as you did. I was thinking of editing the beginning down a bit also... but the basic info in there now is pretty good. It is just a guideline as to length.... and really it is not so terribly long presently.

1965: 1947:

As far as the Technical Alliance disbanded in 1921 goes. That information is incorrect. Technocracy Inc. material states the organization was still researching and only became known as Technocracy in 1930 as is shown in their archives and some news articles(e.g.

1898:

was renamed Technocracy Incorporated in 1930 and in 1932 its basic findings were published. In the fall of 1933, Technocracy was incorporated in New York State as a “nonsectarian, educational-research membership organization” (Technocracy Digest, No. 231, pp 4).

2236:

over-sourcing to the Buris information is not healthy for the article and since this group still exists calling them 'possibly fascist' seems bad form or libel when there is no real support for that assumption --Fidel Drumbo 17:04, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

995:

Your right. I added this below into the history section, based on the information from their website and some other places. I also added the reference citation to a copy of their trend events publication in the history section and publications section.

827:

One is dealing directly with that group information (TechInc) and the other dealing with the movement of social scientists and engineers and others that went through a period of attempting to think up alternative constructs for society (TechMovement).

832:

makes a good stand alone article with a different perspective than the Technocracy Incorporated article because it gets into the antecedents and that is a broad ... and long topic. No doubt it can still be improved with more citations and references.

819:

At this point it makes sense not to merge the two articles. Each article is playing a different role. The TechInc article talks directly about the focus of that organization and relates directly to the different people involved in the history of it.

1994:

Does anybody know the importance of this paragraph? It doesn't make sense together. Nor does the second sentence even appear relevant to the first. I also seems like an opinion. Does any body know what fascists implications it's referring to? In the

2412:. There is clear overlapping which should be avoided. Technocracy Incorporated is important to be mentioned in the context of technocracy movement, but as a separate article it serve just a promotional purpose on may be even a potential POV fork. 1302:

of social operation." (Buzz highlighted.) That should be left in double quotes somewhere or removed entirely, and replaced with some actual description of what Tech Inc is and does. The article should be rewritten to have a tone closer to, say,

1344:

There are no footnotes. There was no personality cult around Scott. That is ridiculous. The movement did not split in the 40's. That is unsourced. Not true either to my knowledge. What break away group? That is nonsense or gibberish. The

2339:

interesting and relevant information. Also deleting the official website doesn't seem to help portray yourself as presenting a neutral point of view.( I will restore the officially listed website as Technocracyinc.org) as is shown here

1209:

As far as introducing factual errors, that is correct. You have done that. That is not a great way to revert an article... putting in factual errors. Errors that are not only wrong but slanted in such a way using buzzwords... such as

2343:

Advocate or had a personal stake in it. You have obviously had some issues with those other editors. I'm just getting the impression that this information you have admitted to is seemingly clouding your judgement on these articles.

765:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Network of European Technocrats - That article should go into an Afd.. because the whole concept of it does not make sense. It was originally written by the person that originated the NET article to

2127:, anything that could be construed as criticism of TI, no matter how well sourced, has been removed from the page. Much unsourced material, and material from unreliable sources, has been added. Surepost.com, for example, is not a 1281:

I initially changed the lead section because it was (and, since your reversion, still is) a mess. The lead should provide sufficient context to clue in readers to the rest of the article. Eg. "Technocracy Incorporated proposes a

1835:

I've looked more closely at the article now. The "Technocracy Study Course" is mentioned six times, and the "Trend Events" newsletter is mentioned three times. I would have thought that each deserves to be mentioned once only.

286: 912:

Stabile, Donald R. "Veblen and the Political Economy of the Engineer: the radical thinker and engineering leaders came to technocratic ideas at the same time," American Journal of Economics and Sociology (45:1) 1986, 43-44.

1816:

that is being promoted, but the "Technocracy Study Course", which is mentioned at least three times in the article, twice in bold type. In fact, there are a great many articles on WP which seem to be promoting this course:

153: 1632:

I just presented a structure. A structured article that carefully builds up context and information as its progresses is easy to read and easy to edit; hence the clarifying comments interleaved with the example

663:

Further more there is no real Technocracy movement outside of the North America. Isenhand or Technocrate or Andrew Wallace is promoting the idea of a movement because he has written a book about it as such

2303:

Looking at the history of the article you appear to be in a lock tight position of pov pushing here. Too bad its an interesting subject and you have tried to even have the article deleted according to the

1350:

Fonds finding you have put up to incorporate is not really a good source. It is based on an old wikipedia edit from a year or two ago. Really that is all it is besides some other incidental information.

233: 1715: 200: 1001:

Today as they have done continuously since their inception, this groups members partake in discussion groups, publish quarterly magazines, and advocate for the original concepts of a

1894:

that would provide a better standard of living while conserving non-renewable resources. According to their published information this would ensure ‘an economy of abundance’. The

147: 1220:

Your argument that it could be improved? Everything may be improved. It is sourced though pretty well or well enough... or better than most. Improvements can be made of course.

1949: 1786:. This sort of blatant repetition is the type of thing you would expect in advertising material, not an encyclopedia, and this article and some other articles related to 1957: 44: 1971:. Basically, technocrats began an "energy survey of North America" since 1918 and since then have been doing so in various names until they finally incorporated. 2495: 2233:

I think if you want to be taken seriously, and help to move the article in the right direction, that the surepost.com links should be removed from the article.

2184:

I think if you want to be taken seriously, and help to move the article in the right direction, that the surepost.com links should be removed from the article.

2500: 2005:

by some to the technocracy movement may have contributed to its loss off appeal as a movement, and by the mid-1930s the technocracy movement was in decline.

2505: 2089: 1433:

and a new method of social operation. Today this groups members partake in discussion groups, publish quarterly magazines and a monthly newsletter called

1639:

predictions of armageddon to sell itself. I wish you good luck with any subsequent improvements, but personally this article looks to be a lost cause. ~

79: 1903:

We need to use reliable sources such as published books, on Knowledge, rather than self-published websites. Books which are readily available include:

2520: 644:

Following the discussion on the technocracy movement page this article has been split again. Technocracy Inc is just one organisation in the movement.

2198:

double-breasted suit, gray shirt, and blue necktie, with a monad insignia on the lapel', and its members saluted Scott in public". See for yourself,

390: 2515: 1078: 85: 2163: 2102: 2007: 1976: 1782:

I would also add that there is much material in this article which is duplicated in related articles, and I have discussed some of this at

770:

there even was a Technocracy movement connected outside of North America which there is not.. at least not connected as to the same ideas.

305:. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see 252:. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see 381: 361: 168: 1601::After a paragraph break, go into their plans for world domination (this "Technate"), the defining characteristic of the organization: 1558:

After a paragraph break, go into their plans for world domination (this "Technate"), the defining characteristic of the organization:

2047:

its written material that it is not democratic, fascist, or autocratic, plutocratic etc. Fidel Drumbo 16:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

135: 2510: 2329: 2252: 2063: 1650: 1589: 1396: 1318: 1124: 1104: 474: 762: 1953: 612: 99: 30: 1967:

that confirms that Technocracy Inc. was a continuation from the Technical Alliance from a notable science magazine called the

104: 20: 793:

material. Stream lined article, shortening some non cited material. Made some syntax and sentence structure more readable.

129: 74: 1069:

Claiming I "removed notability information". Actually, the new lead supports it by clearly tying the organization to the

2090:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Za1TAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ZDgNAAAAIBAJ&pg=6587,6784248&dq=technocracy&hl=en

1009: 465: 429: 336: 761:

That article should not be merged it should be deleted (Technocratic movement]]. It originally was a vehicle for this

65: 125: 1607: 1523: 1429:. Technocracy Technate design is claimed by TechInc to be a science applied to society method, using the metric of 2373:. There's not enough here for a stand alone article. I propose that this article be merged and then redirected to 2159: 2128: 1812:

Following on from what I've just said, I'm adding an advertising tag to the top of the article. It is not only

689: 282: 229: 196: 175: 2467: 2167: 2106: 2011: 1980: 1813: 1787: 812: 660: 524: 302: 249: 24: 2478: 324: 109: 2340: 1999:

article it tributes the decline of the movement to the New Deal and this is supposed to be about a group.

1604:

only is the design. Your above intro. is not written well as to subject .... Sorry. It does not advocate a

1265: 2382: 1783: 2348: 2325: 2248: 2059: 1860: 1759: 1722:

But where is the actual evidence that TI has been so important and influential? Perhaps there are some

1697: 1684:

all feel for the subject this may be a good link... it is a little long... but the information is good.

1646: 1622: 1585: 1485: 1392: 1355: 1314: 1225: 1120: 1100: 1044: 1016: 981:

The history for this page ends in 1934. Are there no further events in this organization's history? --

967: 937: 918: 898: 871: 852: 837: 798: 775: 755: 741: 726: 705: 674: 627: 594: 342: 1093:

like "scientific social design", should be expunged and replaced with more factual, neutral details. ~

700:- all information must be verifiable from reliable, third-party sources, otherwise it will be removed! 659:

There is no real connection between Dr. Andrew Wallace's group the Network of European Technocrats and

635: 616: 1685: 141: 2434: 2374: 2370: 2359: 2317: 2240: 2124: 2051: 1477: 1339:

Looking at the article you wish to use as a guide does not inspire much good information. Excerpt...

1178:

Biophysical economics - This info presented in this citation is not connected to TechInc in any way.

1144: 952: 808: 685: 520: 2300:

as a citation seems beyond odd. They have a whole section on the subject of Technocracy. So again???

1419:

Here is a current copy of the intro. Would any one like to suggest changes..? or is this agreeable?

189: 1680: 986: 161: 55: 473:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

389:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1895: 1879: 1541: 1070: 649: 70: 847:

There is no purpose other than publicity in duplicating this article using to different names.--

2450: 2400: 2378: 2278: 2207: 2136: 2029: 1934: 1887: 1841: 1825: 1795: 1732: 1473: 1090: 1082: 298: 245: 51: 1464:

advocates contend that it is becoming ever more apparent that our present form of economy, a

2417: 2344: 2321: 2244: 2055: 1856: 1755: 1693: 1641: 1618: 1599:

Who when and what is already in the side bar. Very easy to see and read. Clears things up?

1580: 1481: 1469: 1387: 1351: 1309: 1221: 1115: 1095: 1086: 1031: 1012: 963: 933: 914: 894: 867: 848: 833: 794: 771: 737: 722: 716:

It does not make a lot of sense to delete information directly related on wikipedia articles

701: 670: 1058:

Branding me an "uninvolved editor". All written content on Knowledge is licensed under the

1055:

without comment. I am sure most editors will agree that the article needs much improvement.

2430: 1663:

Thanks for your opinion. Irrelevant fringe group it is not. It is a mainstream group that

1510: 1438: 1140: 1002: 948: 1544:

to disseminate the discoveries and ideas of its members among the general public. It was

1077:

For these reasons, I have re-reverted. This article should be improved by making it more

1113:

PS: I may have introduced some factual errors; I won't object to anyone fixing those. ~

2288:

Gut the article? Tsk tsk. Removing the official web-page from the information box etc?

1743: 1742:

You probably should read some of the sources and ref/citations before jumping in here.

1723: 1672: 1457: 1159: 982: 763:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Network_of_European_Technocrats

2489: 1968: 1891: 1676: 1611: 1545: 1527: 1426: 1063: 1010:

http://www.technocracy.org/Trendevents/June_2008_TRENDEVENTS%5B1%5D%5B2%5D%5B2%5D.pdf

790: 736:

Editor removed links and expanded information again. Restored broadened explanation.

645: 457: 386: 2454: 2438: 2421: 2404: 2386: 2352: 2289: 2282: 2229: 2211: 2171: 2140: 2110: 2033: 2015: 1984: 1938: 1864: 1845: 1829: 1799: 1763: 1736: 1701: 1654: 1626: 1593: 1489: 1400: 1359: 1322: 1286:

change in both the economy and in forms of governance in North America. Technocracy

1229: 1148: 1128: 1108: 1020: 990: 971: 956: 941: 922: 902: 875: 856: 841: 802: 779: 745: 730: 709: 678: 653: 638: 619: 597: 2446: 2396: 2274: 2203: 2132: 2025: 1930: 1837: 1821: 1791: 1728: 1506: 1465: 1261: 1243: 1052: 697: 1561:

TechInc proposes a major overhaul of the economies and societies in North America

2291:

Its their homepage and official site and they are a non profit. They say so here

1062:

and almost anyone is allowed to edit articles. In particular, editors should not

2413: 2366: 2298: 1996: 1754:

is pointless. It is only information from a notable group that is still around.

1425:

proposes a fundamental change in both the economy and in forms of governance in

693: 373: 355: 1610:, a government of technical and scientific experts, to govern the continent of 1526:, a government of technical and scientific experts, to govern the continent of 560:

Please do not post discussions within this box, this is for easy reference only

2294:

A non profit or whatever can not have its information site on Knowledge,? Huh!

1446: 1005:

based scientific social design. They also publish a monthly newsletter called

447: 947:

lead section could really do with reducing down to two or three paragraphs --

2468:

http://surepost.com/igdtech/technocracy/pdf/THE_ENERGY_DISTRIBUTION_CARD.pdf

1136: 665: 451: 1886:

The group's aim was to design a new system of production and distribution (

591:

Taking decades to amass "thousands" of members is no great accomplishment.

441: 423: 2479:

http://archive1.macs.ualberta.ca/FindingAids/Technocracy/technocracy.html

1461: 1453: 1385:

list of publications). It is not sufficiently neutral in presentation. ~

1567:

called the "Technate" design, first detailed in their 19xx publication,

1304: 588:

It's not a bad article, but the adverb "quickly" seems POV in all uses.

1909:

Technocracy and the American Dream: The Technocracy Movement 1900-1941

1449:

Official Technocracy Incorporated Website stating their authenticity

1430: 470: 1747: 1179: 1719:(UTC) And this is the general position presented in this article. 1686:

http://www.technocracy.org/Archives/History%20&%20Purpose-r.htm

888:

Energy accounting section reference now pointing to Fezer article.

2149:

fascistic implications". No connection to the organization at all.

932:

Made the beginning any way of a lead section for the article....

1818: 1059: 615:. And yes, this current article on Technocracy is totally real. 2131:. All of this has left the article unbalanced and not neutral. 1441:

based scientific social design, presented in their publication

2292: 506: 318: 265: 212: 184: 15: 1667:

in order to protect their information. As said this issue of

1495:

Needs structure and checkpoints. First, to state what it is:

607:

Uhhh.... World of Darkness... Mage... this is fake, right?

2162:

besides the surepost.com links that confirm the material.

2365:

Quite a substantial part of this article is repeated in

585:

This article seems to have been written by its subject.

2199: 1246:

or two to see how articles should be properly sourced.)

1042:

Marking a non-trivial, possibly contentious change as "

1035: 548: 542: 536: 530: 310: 306: 277: 257: 253: 224: 1034:, I am rather disappointed at your editquette in this 160: 2024:

I think this paragraph is fine and have restored it.

1882:

actually disbanded in 1921, as the TA article shows.

1182:

nor this ECONOMY AND THERMODYNAMICS. Excerpt below...

2395:. TI is not notable enough to have its own article. 1744:

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Biophysical_economics

1160:

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Biophysical_economics

469:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 385:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 1540:It was created as a continuation of the disbanded 684:I've now formally added tags to propose merging 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1437:, and advocate for the original concepts of a 891:Added another reference link to Ivie, Wilton 174: 8: 1923:Technological Utopianism in American Culture 1790:appear to be largely promotional in nature. 1671:could have been dropped a bit ago I think. 418: 350: 1085:like "unique" and "ensure our survival", 893:A Place to Live: 1955 Technocracy Digest 789:Added a linked citation and reference to 754:AfD makes the most sense for the article 666:http://web.telia.com/~u11319012/index.htm 335:does not require a rating on Knowledge's 199:on 20 December 2009 (UTC). The result of 1944:to further strengthen the information. 1505:) is an organization founded in 19xx by 1468:, and our present form of governance, a 866:.. but not really the other way around. 611:For reference, this user is refering to 2460: 1089:like "science applied to society", and 688:into this article. As discussed on the 420: 352: 1606:that advocates the establishment of a 1522:that advocates the establishment of a 909:Added this reference link on history. 1964:) Here is another third party source 463:This redirect is within the scope of 379:This redirect is within the scope of 322: 7: 2496:Redirect-Class organization articles 1548:in the United States in 1934 due to 1480:method based on science principles. 2501:NA-importance organization articles 2297:Also removing a government website 1918:State University of New York Press. 1855:article... tags are a last resort. 399:Knowledge:WikiProject Organizations 341:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 2506:WikiProject Organizations articles 1688:History and Purpose of Technocracy 1190:Mill, Spencer and Balfour Stewart. 402:Template:WikiProject Organizations 14: 1911:, University of California Press. 1748:http://ecen.com/eee9/ecoterme.htm 1380:As stated, I was referencing the 1180:http://ecen.com/eee9/ecoterme.htm 566:Remove Unsuitable Primary Sources 2521:Knowledge pages with to-do lists 2231:and making statements like this 1784:Talk: Energy accounting#Redirect 514: 450: 440: 422: 372: 354: 323: 269: 216: 188: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 1564:into a new operating structure 613:Technocracy (World of Darkness) 195:This article was nominated for 1578:Hope that clears things up. ~ 570:Cite as many facts as possible 1: 2516:NA-importance energy articles 2455:21:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC) 2283:01:27, 28 February 2011 (UTC) 2212:02:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC) 2172:19:48, 24 February 2011 (UTC) 2141:18:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC) 2111:23:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC) 1985:02:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC) 1865:03:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC) 1846:02:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC) 1830:19:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC) 1800:19:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC) 1764:15:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC) 1737:09:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC) 746:17:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC) 731:15:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC) 598:15:06, 10 December 2005 (UTC) 477:and see a list of open tasks. 393:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 2439:20:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC) 2306:Article for Deletion history 2034:21:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC) 2016:00:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC) 1939:22:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC) 1139:) but in a different way. -- 679:03:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 654:12:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC) 620:04:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC) 483:Knowledge:WikiProject Energy 2422:11:41, 5 October 2011 (UTC) 2405:23:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 2387:09:56, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 1702:17:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1655:16:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1627:16:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1594:16:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1490:15:14, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1401:16:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1360:16:04, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1323:15:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1230:14:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1149:14:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1129:13:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 1109:12:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC) 486:Template:WikiProject Energy 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 2537: 2228:It is their official site 1925:Syracuse University Press. 1914:Beverly H. Burris (1993). 1750:- Tagging that section as 1292:science applied to society 1217:science applied to society 2353:01:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC) 1907:William E. Aikin (1977). 1675:is not a buzzword... and 1021:02:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC) 991:20:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC) 972:16:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC) 957:16:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC) 942:15:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC) 923:20:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC) 903:00:44, 23 June 2008 (UTC) 876:00:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC) 857:00:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC) 842:14:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC) 803:15:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC) 690:Talk:Technocracy movement 435: 382:WikiProject Organizations 367: 349: 309:; for its talk page, see 256:; for its talk page, see 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 2511:NA-Class energy articles 1921:Howard P. Segal (2005). 1890:) based for continental 1814:Technocracy Incorporated 1788:Technocracy Incorporated 1569:Technocracy Study Course 1499:Technocracy Incorporated 1443:Technocracy Study Course 1423:Technocracy Incorporated 813:Technocracy Incorporated 780:02:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 661:Technocracy Incorporated 525:Technocracy Incorporated 303:Technocracy Incorporated 278:Technocracy Study Course 250:Technocracy Incorporated 25:Technocracy Incorporated 1537:Then a history lesson: 1460:crisis now developing, 710:12:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC) 639:04:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC) 1901: 785:Willard Gibbs citation 75:avoid personal attacks 2158:I have already added 1884: 1710:Better sources needed 1519:...and what it does: 756:Technocratic movement 628:Technocratic_movement 405:organization articles 100:Neutral point of view 2445:Merge now complete. 2375:Technocracy movement 2371:Technocracy movement 2360:Technocracy movement 2125:Technocracy movement 1478:Non-market economics 1158:that confirms that. 809:Technocracy movement 686:Technocracy movement 297:. Its contents were 293:with a consensus to 244:. Its contents were 240:with a consensus to 105:No original research 2160:WP:Reliable sources 1990:Confusing paragraph 1916:Technocracy at work 1681:Columbia University 2129:WP:Reliable source 1896:Technical Alliance 1880:Technical Alliance 1873:Disputed paragraph 1714:Skip, You've said 1542:Technical Alliance 1071:Technical Alliance 554:Updated 2008-05-01 466:WikiProject Energy 337:content assessment 281:was nominated for 228:was nominated for 86:dispute resolution 47: 2358:Propose merge to 2334: 2320:comment added by 2257: 2243:comment added by 2068: 2054:comment added by 1888:energy accounting 1474:Energy Accounting 1212:against democracy 603:World of Darkness 578: 577: 505: 504: 501: 500: 497: 496: 417: 416: 413: 412: 317: 316: 264: 263: 211: 210: 183: 182: 66:Assume good faith 43: 2528: 2481: 2476: 2470: 2465: 2333: 2314: 2256: 2237: 2067: 2048: 1679:was not a kook. 1470:political system 1268:looks promising. 1264:.) For example, 1262:reliable sources 1053:maintenance tags 1038:. Specifically: 1032:User:Skipsievert 555: 518: 517: 507: 491: 490: 489:energy articles 487: 484: 481: 460: 455: 454: 444: 437: 436: 426: 419: 407: 406: 403: 400: 397: 376: 369: 368: 358: 351: 328: 327: 319: 273: 272: 266: 238:06 November 2009 220: 219: 213: 192: 185: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 2536: 2535: 2531: 2530: 2529: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2477: 2473: 2466: 2462: 2429:. Per above. -- 2363: 2315: 2270: 2238: 2121: 2049: 1992: 1875: 1810: 1808:Advertising tag 1712: 1653: 1592: 1511:M. King Hubbert 1439:Thermoeconomics 1417: 1399: 1321: 1288:Technate design 1127: 1107: 1029: 1027:Article cleanup 1003:Thermoeconomics 979: 930: 886: 817: 787: 759: 718: 631: 605: 583: 574: 573: 529: 515: 488: 485: 482: 479: 478: 456: 449: 404: 401: 398: 395: 394: 291:26 October 2009 270: 217: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 2534: 2532: 2524: 2523: 2518: 2513: 2508: 2503: 2498: 2488: 2487: 2483: 2482: 2471: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2442: 2441: 2424: 2407: 2362: 2356: 2336: 2335: 2301: 2295: 2269: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2164:68.226.118.248 2153: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2120: 2117: 2116: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2103:68.226.118.248 2095: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2081: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2070: 2069: 2039: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2019: 2018: 2008:68.226.118.248 1991: 1988: 1977:68.226.118.248 1927: 1926: 1919: 1912: 1874: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1867: 1849: 1848: 1809: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1777: 1776: 1775: 1774: 1767: 1766: 1724:New York Times 1711: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1689: 1673:Thermodynamics 1658: 1657: 1645: 1635: 1634: 1597: 1596: 1584: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1458:Global Warming 1416: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1391: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1313: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1270: 1269: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1168: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1152: 1151: 1119: 1099: 1075: 1074: 1067: 1056: 1049: 1028: 1025: 978: 975: 946: 929: 926: 908: 885: 884:reference link 882: 881: 880: 879: 878: 860: 859: 816: 806: 786: 783: 758: 752: 750: 735: 717: 714: 713: 712: 657: 656: 630: 624: 623: 622: 604: 601: 582: 579: 576: 575: 572: 571: 568: 557: 512: 510: 503: 502: 499: 498: 495: 494: 492: 475:the discussion 462: 461: 445: 433: 432: 427: 415: 414: 411: 410: 408: 391:the discussion 377: 365: 364: 359: 347: 346: 340: 329: 315: 314: 289:was closed on 287:The discussion 274: 262: 261: 236:was closed on 234:The discussion 221: 209: 208: 201:the discussion 193: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2533: 2522: 2519: 2517: 2514: 2512: 2509: 2507: 2504: 2502: 2499: 2497: 2494: 2493: 2491: 2480: 2475: 2472: 2469: 2464: 2461: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2443: 2440: 2436: 2432: 2428: 2425: 2423: 2419: 2415: 2411: 2408: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2394: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2384: 2380: 2376: 2372: 2368: 2361: 2357: 2355: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2341: 2331: 2327: 2323: 2319: 2311: 2307: 2302: 2299: 2296: 2293: 2290: 2287: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2267: 2254: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2234: 2230: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2213: 2209: 2205: 2201: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2173: 2169: 2165: 2161: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2142: 2138: 2134: 2130: 2126: 2118: 2112: 2108: 2104: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2091: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2085: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2065: 2061: 2057: 2053: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2035: 2031: 2027: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2017: 2013: 2009: 2006: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1998: 1989: 1987: 1986: 1982: 1978: 1972: 1970: 1969:New Scientist 1966: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1951: 1945: 1941: 1940: 1936: 1932: 1924: 1920: 1917: 1913: 1910: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1900: 1897: 1893: 1892:North America 1889: 1883: 1881: 1872: 1866: 1862: 1858: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1807: 1801: 1797: 1793: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1765: 1761: 1757: 1753: 1752:advertisement 1749: 1745: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1725: 1720: 1717: 1709: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1690: 1687: 1682: 1678: 1677:Willard Gibbs 1674: 1670: 1666: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1643: 1637: 1636: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1615: 1613: 1612:North America 1609: 1602: 1595: 1591: 1587: 1583: 1582: 1577: 1576: 1570: 1566: 1563: 1560: 1559: 1557: 1556: 1550: 1547: 1543: 1539: 1538: 1536: 1535: 1529: 1528:North America 1525: 1521: 1520: 1518: 1517: 1512: 1508: 1504: 1501:(abbreviated 1500: 1497: 1496: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1455: 1450: 1448: 1444: 1440: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1427:North America 1424: 1420: 1415:Intro section 1414: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1389: 1383: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1348: 1343: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1312: 1311: 1306: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1289: 1285: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1276: 1275: 1267: 1263: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1245: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1236: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1218: 1213: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1198: 1197: 1192: 1191: 1181: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1162:Excerpt below 1161: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1150: 1146: 1142: 1138: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1117: 1111: 1110: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1097: 1092: 1088: 1084: 1080: 1072: 1068: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1054: 1050: 1047: 1046: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1037: 1033: 1026: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1011: 1006: 1004: 997: 993: 992: 988: 984: 976: 974: 973: 969: 965: 959: 958: 954: 950: 944: 943: 939: 935: 927: 925: 924: 920: 916: 910: 906: 905: 904: 900: 896: 889: 883: 877: 873: 869: 864: 863: 862: 861: 858: 854: 850: 846: 845: 844: 843: 839: 835: 829: 825: 821: 814: 810: 807: 805: 804: 800: 796: 792: 791:Willard Gibbs 784: 782: 781: 777: 773: 769: 764: 757: 753: 751: 748: 747: 743: 739: 733: 732: 728: 724: 715: 711: 707: 703: 699: 695: 691: 687: 683: 682: 681: 680: 676: 672: 667: 662: 655: 651: 647: 643: 642: 641: 640: 637: 629: 625: 621: 618: 614: 610: 609: 608: 602: 600: 599: 596: 595:24.21.189.221 592: 589: 586: 580: 569: 567: 564: 563: 562: 561: 556: 553: 550: 547: 544: 541: 538: 535: 532: 528: 526: 522: 511: 509: 508: 493: 476: 472: 468: 467: 459: 458:Energy portal 453: 448: 446: 443: 439: 438: 434: 431: 428: 425: 421: 409: 396:Organizations 392: 388: 387:Organizations 384: 383: 378: 375: 371: 370: 366: 363: 362:Organizations 360: 357: 353: 348: 344: 338: 334: 330: 326: 321: 320: 312: 308: 304: 300: 296: 292: 288: 284: 280: 279: 275: 268: 267: 259: 255: 251: 247: 243: 239: 235: 231: 227: 226: 222: 215: 214: 206: 202: 198: 194: 191: 187: 186: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 2474: 2463: 2426: 2409: 2392: 2364: 2337: 2316:— Preceding 2309: 2305: 2271: 2239:— Preceding 2232: 2122: 2050:— Preceding 2003: 1993: 1973: 1946: 1942: 1928: 1908: 1902: 1885: 1876: 1857:skip sievert 1811: 1756:skip sievert 1751: 1721: 1713: 1694:skip sievert 1668: 1665:Incorporated 1664: 1640: 1619:skip sievert 1605: 1600: 1598: 1579: 1568: 1565: 1562: 1549: 1546:incorporated 1507:Howard Scott 1502: 1498: 1482:skip sievert 1466:Price system 1451: 1447:Authenticity 1442: 1435:Trend Events 1434: 1422: 1421: 1418: 1386: 1381: 1352:skip sievert 1346: 1340: 1308: 1299: 1295: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1266:this summary 1222:skip sievert 1216: 1211: 1200: 1199: 1194: 1193: 1188: 1187: 1169: 1167: 1114: 1112: 1094: 1079:encyclopedic 1076: 1043: 1030: 1013:skip sievert 1008: 1007:Trend Events 1000: 998: 994: 980: 964:skip sievert 960: 945: 934:skip sievert 931: 928:lead section 915:skip sievert 911: 907: 895:skip sievert 892: 890: 887: 868:skip sievert 834:skip sievert 830: 826: 822: 818: 795:skip sievert 788: 772:skip sievert 767: 760: 749: 738:skip sievert 734: 723:skip sievert 719: 671:skip sievert 658: 636:154.5.41.198 632: 617:154.5.41.198 606: 593: 590: 587: 584: 565: 559: 558: 551: 545: 539: 533: 519: 513: 464: 380: 343:WikiProjects 332: 294: 290: 276: 241: 237: 223: 204: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2367:Technocracy 2345:Googlesalot 2322:FidelDrumbo 2245:FidelDrumbo 2056:FidelDrumbo 1997:Technocracy 1608:technocracy 1524:technocracy 1284:fundamental 999:Added bit, 849:tequendamia 702:FlagSteward 626:Merge with 307:its history 254:its history 148:free images 31:not a forum 2490:Categories 2431:Epipelagic 2308:here. The 1651:many words 1590:many words 1456:, and the 1397:many words 1319:many words 1300:new method 1141:Firebladed 1125:many words 1105:many words 949:Firebladed 521:To-do list 1669:buzzwords 1296:blueprint 1202:for free. 1137:Democracy 1091:buzzwords 1066:articles. 1051:Removing 983:TarrVetus 88:if needed 71:Be polite 27:redirect. 21:talk page 2330:contribs 2318:unsigned 2310:conflict 2253:contribs 2241:unsigned 2123:As with 2064:contribs 2052:unsigned 1773:article. 1462:technate 1454:Peak Oil 1305:this one 1087:vagaries 1083:advocacy 815:articles 721:website. 646:Isenhand 333:redirect 283:deletion 230:deletion 225:Technate 197:deletion 56:get help 29:This is 2447:Johnfos 2427:Support 2410:Support 2397:Johnfos 2393:Support 2275:Johnfos 2204:Johnfos 2133:Johnfos 2119:POV tag 2026:Johnfos 1931:Johnfos 1838:Johnfos 1822:Johnfos 1792:Johnfos 1729:Johnfos 1647:Speaker 1586:Speaker 1503:TechInc 1393:Speaker 1315:Speaker 1121:Speaker 1101:Speaker 977:History 549:refresh 537:history 154:WP refs 142:scholar 2414:Beagel 2268:Update 1431:energy 1036:revert 480:Energy 471:Energy 430:Energy 339:scale. 299:merged 246:merged 126:Google 1642:Jafet 1633:text. 1581:Jafet 1476:in a 1452:With 1388:Jafet 1310:Jafet 1298:of a 1294:as a 1116:Jafet 1096:Jafet 1064:"own" 1045:minor 768:claim 698:WP:RS 543:watch 331:This 301:into 295:merge 248:into 242:merge 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 2451:talk 2435:talk 2418:talk 2401:talk 2383:talk 2369:and 2349:talk 2326:talk 2279:talk 2249:talk 2208:talk 2200:here 2168:talk 2137:talk 2107:talk 2060:talk 2030:talk 2012:talk 1981:talk 1962:Here 1960:and 1958:Here 1954:Here 1952:and 1950:Here 1935:talk 1861:talk 1842:talk 1826:talk 1796:talk 1760:talk 1746:and 1733:talk 1716:here 1698:talk 1623:talk 1509:and 1486:talk 1382:tone 1356:talk 1347:Buzz 1307:. ~ 1226:talk 1145:talk 1060:GDFL 1017:talk 987:talk 968:talk 953:talk 938:talk 919:talk 899:talk 872:talk 853:talk 838:talk 811:and 799:talk 776:talk 742:talk 727:talk 706:talk 696:and 694:WP:V 675:talk 650:talk 531:edit 523:for 311:here 258:here 205:keep 203:was 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 1929:-- 1649:of 1588:of 1395:of 1317:of 1290:is 1123:of 1103:of 581:POV 285:. 232:. 176:TWL 2492:: 2453:) 2437:) 2420:) 2403:) 2385:) 2379:LK 2377:. 2351:) 2332:) 2328:• 2281:) 2255:) 2251:• 2210:) 2202:. 2170:) 2139:) 2109:) 2066:) 2062:• 2032:) 2014:) 1983:) 1937:) 1863:) 1844:) 1828:) 1820:. 1798:) 1762:) 1735:) 1700:) 1625:) 1488:) 1358:) 1244:FA 1228:) 1147:) 1081:; 1048:". 1019:) 989:) 970:) 955:) 940:) 921:) 901:) 874:) 855:) 840:) 801:) 778:) 744:) 729:) 708:) 677:) 652:) 156:) 54:; 2449:( 2433:( 2416:( 2399:( 2381:( 2347:( 2324:( 2277:( 2247:( 2206:( 2166:( 2135:( 2105:( 2058:( 2028:( 2010:( 1979:( 1933:( 1859:( 1840:( 1824:( 1794:( 1758:( 1731:( 1696:( 1621:( 1614:. 1571:. 1551:. 1530:. 1484:( 1445:. 1354:( 1224:( 1143:( 1073:. 1015:( 985:( 966:( 951:( 936:( 917:( 897:( 870:( 851:( 836:( 797:( 774:( 740:( 725:( 704:( 673:( 648:( 552:· 546:· 540:· 534:· 527:: 345:: 313:. 260:. 207:. 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index