. ✗plicit 00:07, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Anti-globalization have now evolved into much wider scope than content of the target article.
The target article, anti-globalization movement, currently mainly describe leftists/socialists who oppost the globalized impact of multinational cooperation and the spread of capitalism.
However, in the past decade or so, a new form of anti-globalization have arisen across the world, marked by leaders like Donald Trump and Le Pen, and political parties like UKIP and AfD.
The target article anti-globalization movement spent only 4 sentences describing this, in a short section of #Nationalist opposition against globalization, and two of the four lines, aka half of it, are to compare and contrast these nationalist activies from anticapitalist movements that are the theme of the article anti-globalization movement.
In my opinion, from the perspective of the entire Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, this ratio of coverage for nationalist anti-globalization compared to socialist anti-globalization are obviously undue, with even some local activities being listed with more details than nationalist anti globalization caused political events that have global and lasting influence. However, the current page of anti-globalization movement is a relatively self-contained page that describe the anticapitalist movement itself, and thus I think it would be bad idea to rewritten entirely to give due weight to the rise of nationalist anti-globalization in the 21st century, instead it could be a better idea to transform the page currently titled anti-globalization into either an article or a disambiation page, pointing to another new page of yet to be decided title that write about nationalist anti-globalization in addition to the anticapitalist anti-globalization movement. The Britiannica article on anti-globalization: [https://www.britannica.com/event/antiglobalization] discussed the differences and common parts between capitalist anti-globalization movement and nationalist anti-globalization movement, which make me think both courses of actions are possible, either converting the page currently acting as redirect (anti-globalization) into a disambiguation page pointing to separate capitalist/nationalist anti-globalization page, or turn it into a summary page that summarize feature of both sides. But I have not determined which is the best course of action and thus I would like other editors provide some inputs on it.
New antisemitism#Anti-globalization movement provide a bit more relevant content that can be used to establish a new page, no matter it is to be a page for all sort of anti-globalization, or for a new page dedicated to nationalist anti-globalization that the anti-globalization page will become a disambiguation page linking to.
Disclosure: The reason I become aware of this situation was because my previous edit about anti-globalization stance of certain far right part in an Asian country got rolled back by another editor, {{ping|Helper201}}, who stated that anti-globalization page on Wikipedia is describing a movement, and after more in-depth investigation, I found that it is indeed true that the article of anti-globalization on English Wikipedia mainly describe the anticapitalist movement arising in the West since roughly around Vietnam War, and pay little to no attention to the rise of far-right anti-globalization happening across the world since 2010s, and that due to the existing redirect target being a self-contained complete description of what it is describing, it occurs to me that there exists a need to create a new article to describe the phenomenon. C933103 (talk) 20:49, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep for now since it seems the target is the best existent subject we have currently on Wikipedia. I don't think WP:REDLINK applies here since readers look up that term, and really should be directed to something with it other than the search results. However, I have no objection to the redirect being replaced by an article, as long as the redirect is not deleted in the interim. Steel1943 (talk) 22:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
- :What do you think about the other possible action of changing it into a disambiguation page? C933103 (talk) 23:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
- ::I saw the situation and ... as long as this title never becomes a WP:REDLINK, I have no further opinion. Steel1943 (talk) 00:27, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to a disambiguation page. The current target is problematic on its own, and clearly a misnomer. Louis Waweru Talk 10:29, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, currently best target. —Kusma (talk) 11:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, as per Steel1943 ~ carpathianflorist 15:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
