Talk:American Principles Project

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: Libertarianism

	Politics portal This article 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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Libertarianism portal This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as Low-importance).

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to abortion, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Jschweppe06 (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.
Colmanrowan (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.

Notability

Bobo, I expected better of you. You clearly know there's a notability issue, because I've repeatedly pointed it out in edit summaries. Don't remove the tag just to be a troll. You know that press releases and trivial mentions don't support notability. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have added no press releases to article. Also, please avoid personal attacks and assume good faith, as I'm trying to assume good faith while looking over edit summary where you've recently remove over 8000bytes of text & then added notability tag on organization that seems clearly notable (gets 128 hits in google news in 0.22 seconds [1]) While the lengthy article before you began editing few days ago [2], could have used some work, gutting article and tagging for notability seems concerning on article about an organization that seems clearly notable.--BoboMeowCat (talk) 14:26, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You re-added a press release that I had removed because it was a press release; I don't know if this is "adding a press release" in your semantics. But that aside, I'm rather surprised at the foolish things you continue to say here. You know that GOOGLEHITS means nothing because you have to check if the references are actually reliable and significant, and unsurprisingly that Google search brings up a bunch of trivial mentions (eg. a current NJ candidate used to work for them, or pull quotes in articles about education with no discussion of the group), op-eds/unusable sources like OneNewsNow or Newsmax, and paid event listings. The notability tag encourages users to find and cite reliable sources instead of waving at Google, and if the sources cannot actually be found, the group might just not be notable. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:23, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a press release. It's an article from The State Journal about a town hall forum protesting the Common Core. http://www.statejournal.com/story/26783916/second-town-hall-forum-planned-to-discuss-common-core. Added notices at WikiProject Organizations and WikiProject Conservatism that article needs attn establishing notability. --BoboMeowCat (talk) 15:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is it common for the State-Journal to run "articles" consisting entirely of quotations about private organizations' positions and lists of the qualifications of their personnel? With "invit[ations] to attend" their events and check out their Facebook page? I think I'm attributing more journalistic integrity to the State-Journal than you are right now. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article in question is not entirely quotations. [3] Considering we clearly see this source diferently, I brought the dispute to the RS noticeboard.--BoboMeowCat (talk) 00:19, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the notability front, the APP's website can help as it has a page that summarises press coverage of its 2014 gala.[4] Bromley86 (talk) 11:52, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I went through those articles (and a bunch of others) and have managed to add what was in the previous edit (and a few other things) in. Bromley86 (talk) 17:36, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bell as a co-founder

Not totally convinced that this is true. We have one report that mentions it in passing,[5] but it's not mentioned on the APP's site (and they're apparently quite happy with Bell, as they're supporting his campaign[6]). Yet in all the articles I read on the APP (e.g. that last link), Bell is described as having been a director there from 2010-2014. As it was founded in 2009, this calls the co-founder point into question.

I've left it in for the moment. Any thoughts? Bromley86 (talk) 12:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Other sources. Bell's election site.[7]. Washington Times.[8] So looks like it does belong. Bromley86 (talk) 09:40, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Principles Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140704072307/http://americanprinciplesproject.org/app-education/ to http://americanprinciplesproject.org/app-education/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:08, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]