Talk:Correlates of War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Wow, fascinating theory, and a great article overall. I have a bit of a concern with the last sentence "earning the full faith of the CIA, think tanks, and government cabals worldwide." though... it seems a bit non neutral in point of view, or at least snarky. Maybe it's just supposed to be funny? At any rate, in my view it detracts from an otherwise fine article. Can we get a cite to the use of the term "government cabals"? The article could also benefit from more cites in general. It's outside my area of expertise so I can't be the person to provide them. ++Lar: t/c 15:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Entry lacking useful application insight of previous entry

This is a good, technical, yet bare bones entry. It answers questions I had about the previous entry, but it lacks what the previous one delivered in terms of understandability and application. In short, the previous entry went into greater depth about the use of C.O.W. in political scientific analysis of power transitions and hegemony. Specifically, the previous entry cited the CIA opinion, based on C.O.W., that China will approach C.O.W. parity with the U.S. by 2015, and a power transition of global hegemony, hopefully peaceful, will take place.

It is my understanding (and why I was directed to this prior entry, and had since directed others to it myself) that C.O.W. is at the core of Power Transition Analysis, that it in fact exists for that reason, created in the 50s to be sort of a Cold War Thermometer (ooh, that's a damn good metaphor). The new entry has forsaken all the flavor and meaning of the former in exchange for a more precise, technical, but ultimately incomplete result.

Please, if anybody qualified reads this, edit this entry to include the actual policy applications of C.O.W., with an explanation of power transition and hegemony.