@Peter1c:, thanks for starting this lemma. However, removing the quote about the Technocracy movement to a separate article made me wonder if that is really justified. It seems that the four or five initial quotes do relate to "Technocratic" or "technocratic minded," but not to technocracy is the meaning of "an organizational structure or system of governance." Moving them out to an other article seems a more appropriate response. -- Mdd (talk) 17:07, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Peter1c:, I initiated an alternative solution here by moving (the start of) this lemma under Technocrat, moved back the Technocracy movement to Technocracy, and gathered some new quotes there. -- Mdd (talk) 21:31, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi Mdd. Thanks for your message. Sorry, but I didn't understand the reason why Technocrat and Technocracy should be separate articles. I understand there might be different shades of meaning of the term, but are these really captured by the titles, which are just the concrete noun and the abstract noun referring to the same concept? I also didn't understand why the two quotes on "the fanciful scheme popularized by the eccentric intellectual, Howard Scott" which seems to be a very specialized and idiosyncratic use of the term, wouldn't be more appropriate for an article on that specialized movement.
- Thanks for your respons. Separating the both was based on several arguments, such as:
- There is different connotation here. Both terms are not directly related. For example the term democrat also doesn't redirect to democracy but to Democratic Party (United States).
- For me technocrat refers to a state of mind, a social role, or societal role, while the term technocracy refers to a societal entity, a part of society as a whole.
- Lemmas about societal things should restrict to quotes, that refer to that subject. Now I checked the initial Georg Simmel-quote , and noticed that nor the quote, nor the quote title, nor the whole book mentions the term "Technocracy." Now the quote itself is notable, and cited in several sources, yet I have a problem connection this content to technocrat behavior, and don't see a link to technocracy. Now I didn't check the other quotes, but they did seem to suffer from the same dilemma.
- I don't agree with writing of quotes about the Technocracy movement as not directly related to technocracy. The quote by Kuisel (1967) confirms this. Personally I think a separate article about the technocracy movement is a dead end. (but if you want to restart that lemma I will not oppose. Yet do not remove but copy/paste the quote)
- Now I do admit that several quotes about technocracy gathered here, also mention the term "technocrat". For that we could merged the technocratic lemma here. In this case, I think, the initial description should be merged as well. -- Mdd (talk)
- I endorse merging Technocrat into Technocracy. Note that Wikipedia does not have a separate article about such persons distinct from the article about the hypothetical system of governance. (Regarding the comparison with democrat: I think it should probably be a disambiguation page rather than a redirect, because the software does not distinguish between "big 'D' Democrat" and "Little 'd' democrat".) ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:37, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I can agree on that and merged the lemma here. I only merged 2 of the initial 5 quotes. It seems 2 of the other 3 were already in other lemmas (bureaucracy & money) (which came kind of as a surprise); and the last is added to the manager lemma. It seems to me we need a more clear policy about adding quotes to thematic lemma's. -- Mdd (talk) 11:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)