| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kleptocracy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 12 months  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Text or other creative content from Thievocracy was copied or moved into Kleptocracy. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
| Text or other creative content from Unexplained wealth of the Marcos family was copied or moved into Kleptocracy on 2022-11-04. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
NPOV or objective truth?
editGiven that there is significant controversy about who is and isn't a kleptocrat, we shouldn't be in the business of trying to list those that definitely are. I like the change to cite the list from Transparancy International, but I have an alternative suggestion. How about we list those people or systems that have at least N (say 3) moderately-independent creditable citations for being a kleptocracy? We can also cite counter-arguments, if any. This way, we're not trying to define objective truth, and not doing original research, but are instead representing all sides of a controversy. Bovlb 23:20, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
Etymology
editThe OED online entry for kleptocracy gives its etymology as klepto- + -cracy, without mentioning "kleptomania". Merriam-Webster concurs. ~2026-79235-7 (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
- That works for me. I've updated it accordingly, and sourced it using oed.com and merriam-webster.com. The OED second edition has the different etymology I had added, which is strange. I didn't use the adjective "Greek" for both parts of the word since the suffix came to English via French (via Latin and ultimately from Greek). Daniel Quinlan (talk) 23:58, 29 April 2026 (UTC)
@~2026-79235-7: I'm not sure that the edit to add on picaresque fiction
improves the article. It really needs a citation and appears to be original research. In the absence of a source, it should be removed. Perhaps we can find a source explaining how this early usage differs from the modern sense? Daniel Quinlan (talk) 20:28, 30 April 2026 (UTC)
- If you refer to the Wikipedia article on picaresque, you will find named (with citations) among the genre: Gil Blas, Lazarillo de Tormes, and El Buscón. These are the works that Hunt criticized in his essay, with the "kleptocracy" reference arising in discussion of the last. Hunt did not make the meaning of his usage especially clear, but it is not original research to say that the essay was about picaresque. WP:OR does not mandate that every readily verifiable assertion be cited. If you want to dispute this, I would be interested to hear what you think the topic of the essay was instead. ~2026-79235-7 (talk) 02:33, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- I think it's a distraction and it's unsourced. If we could find a reliable source discussing the usage in the essay, I think it's likely to actually be an improvement over the quote itself. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 04:13, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
- It's three words, less of a distraction than the inline quote was. The essay is cited for anyone who wishes to verify the assertion. I'm not going to indulge a dispute for amusement's sake. ~2026-79235-7 (talk) 04:24, 1 May 2026 (UTC)