Talk:Neo-colonial science

Science Low‑importance

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science 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.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Policy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy 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.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Title change

@Jnyssen: I renamed it to a broader title since there are so many competiting metaphors being used -- for international english it doesn't make sense to use one of these very specific terms that only makes sense for certain fields. Let me know if that is helpful, Sadads (talk) 10:46, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One sided, politized polemic

This article presents the issues raised entirely from one perspective, using highly pejorative language. There is nothing here to suggest that local scientists or academics are being prevented from conducting their own work. Rather that no one locally has done the studies until someone has come from elsewhere. The idea that Europeans are somehow stealing the funding in the example given, when the money is essentially actually coming from European taxpayers. The other example seemingly suggests that the Indonesian people are being exploited for western gain, when in fact the results of the study are published for the knowledge of all and everyone, wherever they are. If the participants are not directly benefiting, then this is no different from participants in a western medical trial for example.

Although the article may present a viewpoint held in some circles, it really needs to be much more balanced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.23.252 (talk) 02:10, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]