Draft talk:Epistocracy

This redirect 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

Philosophy

This redirect 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

Possible improvements

When reading the article I get the impression that it starts from the premise that we already are under epistocracies, that it is bad, why it is, etc. When reading sources such as [1], the point of view is different: it would also be a potential exerimental direction for democracies to try. This last source also mentions some possible solutions to objections, which may be worth expanding on... Thanks, —Paleo Neonate – 03:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First, I am sorry for the late response. It is my first experience with Wikipedia as author and I forgot that articles have also talk pages and that I should check them regularly as I did not get any notification. Your feeling is interesting, personally, I am quite in favor of concept of epistocracy, but maybe I tried too much hard to be neutral so it is biased against it. Do you have this feeling also from the last version of the article? I tried to write a short response or counterargument into second paragraphs of each objection. Pnevyk (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redundancy

We also already have the article Noocracy, to which the main space Epistocracy redirects. —Paleo Neonate – 03:12, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I note that the Noocracy article has far too many cn tags... it needs improvement. That said... from reading both that article and this draft, it seems as if the two concepts overlap - and yet are distinct in small details. So I would say this is not a POV fork, but a related topic. The question is: do the distinctions really make each concept notable enough for two stand alone articles... or is the overlap enough to say that the topics are too similar for two articles (if so, they should be merged) Blueboar (talk) 22:35, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that these terms are very similar. I don't know details of noocracy, but I can study it and then tell if these terms should be in one article or deserve their own one. If only one article for both terms will be decided, then I argue that the content should be placed under Epistocracy article, because Google Scholar search for epistocracy gives about 7x more results than for noocracy, the difference is even bigger for example on ResearchGate (epistocracy, noocracy). Pnevyk (talk) 21:54, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]