Talk:Institute for Humane Studies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Random complaints[edit]

I see no reason to list the Institute as a Conservative Organization, as it has always in my opinion been consistently libertarian.--Sajita 19:55, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The majority of this page is utter press release, rah-rah crap. IHS is a Libertarian indoctrination center funded largely by Koch Industries to promote their corporate views. Some two-bit hired PR firm wrote this page for the Institute and someone needs to re-write it. I thought Wiki doesn't allow advertising. 98.230.201.54 (talk) 16:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Adam Schramm98.230.201.54 (talk) 16:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

"classic Liberal"??? Puh-leeeaze 98.230.201.54 (talk) 16:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Adam Schramm98.230.201.54 (talk) 16:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it's worth noting that the LearnLiberty.org propaganda videos on youtube are chock full of blatant disinformation -- like when they describe Adam Smith as an enthusiastic capitalist who was thrilled about division of labor, when in fact he expressed a ton of anti-capitalist views and was absolutely horrified by division of labor, saying it would turn people into sub-human zombies if society didn't try to prevent it. IIRC they also tout Ayn Rand as the epitome of classical liberalism, when objectivism is actually almost the exact opposite. I don't have any sources for this criticism, but I think it's hilarious to call this mill a "classical liberal" organization. 98.184.141.102 (talk) 21:26, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure the two videos you watched had professors who did indeed espouse those views, however, those are two professors out of a network off many more who do not necessarily agree with those views. Adam Smith as an uber-capitalist and Adam Smith as a reluctant capitalist are both views that are perfectly consistent with a classical liberal outlook. Ayn Rand was no liberal, classical or otherwise, she had her own system she called objectivism. Abel (talk) 23:55, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Symbol[edit]

Someone should upload the org's symbol for this article. Also, any information about how the group came to adopt this symbol, or the intended meaning of the symbol, would be much appreciated.

Methinks it seems very similar to the Happy Human symbol. Was this an inspiration in the creation of this organisation's symbol?

Does this organisation's symbol have a name?

Allixpeeke (talk) 21:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, they hired a graphic artist to get their logo so it probably has no link at all to the Happy Human symbol, unless the graphic artist happen to be inspired by that symbol or something. Abel (talk) 03:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

A better earth?[edit]

Unless anyone objects, I think this section should be deleted. It is unsourced, and none of the websites mentioned here seem to be live:

?In 2004, IHS launched aBetterEarth.org, a student-oriented website that stated its goal as exploring "pragmatic approaches to solving environmental problems." The site discussed "alternative environmental approaches, including locally based 'eco-innovation,' outcome-based regulations, quasi-market pricing strategies, corporate and individual stewardship, property rights enforcement as a means of protecting the environment from polluters, and the cultivation of environmental aesthetics." The site criticized traditional environmentalists for being anti-capitalist and for pushing counterproductive government regulations. In 2005 IHS added aWorldConnected.org, which promoted a cosmopolitan free-trade approach to globalization issues and criticized cultural and economic nationalism. These websites are no longer active. IHS has also produced a series of interactive games to illustrate the functioning of spontaneous orders."

Does anyone have opinions on this? Safehaven86 (talk) 00:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Both aBetterEarth.organd aWorldConnected.org look like abandoned projects. Abel (talk) 03:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Koch Summer Fellows Waiting for the Train.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Koch Summer Fellows Waiting for the Train.jpg, was nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons. The result of the nomination was Kept.

Presidents[edit]

Need help with the logic puzzle that is the history of IHS presidents. With citations would be great, but even without citations would be helpful. Abel (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Better source[edit]

Eight sources that all agree with each other are not enough for you? --Abel (talk) 01:25, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Unsupported claims[edit]

  1. "Embedded links that are used to support information in an article are positioned in the same manner as any other reference in the article."
  2. On "Convissor, Kate (August 1999). "The Acton Institute: Of Morality & the Marketplace". Grand Rapids Magazine (Grand Rapids, Michigan): pp. 36–37." Questionable? Not questionable. Self-published? Not self-published. Accessibility? Not inaccessible. "The principle of verifiability implies nothing about ease of access to sources: some online sources may require payment, while some print sources may be available only in university libraries." Non-English sources? This source is in English.
  3. Adding {{advertisement|section}} does not mean that you "Added some meat to the lede." --Abel (talk) 12:05, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


1) "Official links are still subject to standard formatting requirements, such as rich media labeling and not placing links in the text of the article."

2) Regarding the lede sentence, it does not require 8 sources to establish it. Do you know what overkill means? Somedifferentstuff (talk) 13:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

While under citation is a potential legal problem in academic writing, there is no such thing as over citation. Case in point, someone arguing that a magazine article is not a reliable source because they couldn't find it on the Internet in less than four seconds. --Abel (talk) 14:57, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I didn't search for the article and 8 citations for this one sentence is overkill. Also, I've changed it to "libertarian". See source #3. This is one of the problems with using lots of sources, as in this case, the source didn't support what the article stated. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 20:05, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for tagging the dead links. I was able to repair one, but had to delete the other. Had only the unrepairable now dead link been used, those claims would have become unsupported. Thanks to the multiple citations, the unrepairable dead link can be removed without a problem.--Abel (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
You added a better source tag to "Mr. Zywicki was honored as the recipient of the Institute for Humane Studies 2009 Charles G. Koch Outstanding IHS Alum Award" which supports the claim "recognition of alumni accomplishments." There is no better source.--Abel (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
You used a broken citation tag for Huebert's book Libertarianism Today when there is nothing broken about the link.--Abel (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
You added a better source tag to the Charity Navigator citation. Charity Navigator is a highly respected evaluator of non-profit organizations. There is no better source to confirm that the Institute for Humane Studies is a non-profit organization that offers educational and career programs.--Abel (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Substantial[edit]

The word substantial will mean different thing to different people. Please see WP:WORDS and WP:V. Your lead changes have caused the lead to fall out of compliance with WP:LEAD. Please help me to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.--Abel (talk) 14:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Substantial is a clearly defined term. Where is the confusion? I looked at WP:WORDS and the term "substantial" wasn't there. Also, I sourced the word "libertarian" in the lead and added quotes within the references. Don't change it back unless you have supportive sourcing. I also added page needed tags to two references that weren't cited properly. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 15:25, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
The point of WP:WORDS is not to create a definitive list of words to avoid. It is to make the point that words like substantial that could mean hundreds of dollars to some, thousands of dollars to others, and is not remotely as concrete as just coming out and saying the actual amount, which is millions of dollars. --Abel (talk) 16:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Provide the source/s that you're using to add "millions". Post the source/s here on the talk page so I can have a look. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 08:57, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
David C. Nott former president of the Institute for Humane Studies admits that the Institute's Humane Studies Fellowship, only one of many scholarship programs run by the Institute for Humane Studies, awards a half a million dollars in scholarships each year. Nott was president from 1995-2001. If that was the only scholarship program, which it isn't, and this public admission was only true during Nott's presidency, which it isn't, then the Institute Humane Studies has still awarded $3.5 million in scholarships. Which is at least millions, and probably more like tens of millions, but millions is clearly supportable while tens of millions is realistic speculation, but not supportable. Either way, the word substantial needs to go.--Abel (talk) 15:33, 31 July

2012 (UTC)

That's not a reliable source. You'll need another one. Also, see WP:OR. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 22:10, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Please clarify -- do you mean GMU Public Choice is not RS? Or is this about saying "substantial"? I'd keep "substantial" out of the article IAW WP:WEASEL.--S. Rich (talk) 22:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I was getting ready to edit my comment. What he is proposing above violates WP:OR. I'm fine with leaving substantial out of the article. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 22:46, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
If you were fine with leaving out substantial, then what is all that nonsense above?--Abel (talk) 03:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
I used it to replace millions. I'm fine with neither being in the article. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 08:16, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Page numbering[edit]

You added these pages: The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism|year=Aug 15, 2008| pages=217,443

Please quote what it says about the organization from the pages you added. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 18:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

"non-profit organization that offers educational and career programs"--Abel (talk) 20:42, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
What page are you quoting? And what was on the other page? Somedifferentstuff (talk) 08:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Please answer my questions. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 21:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)


You also added: The Right Guide: A Guide to Conservative, Free-Market, and Right-of-Center Organizations page=367

I looked at the source and page 367 shows an address, which doesn't support it being used in the article. Either find the right page or remove it. I've re-tagged the reference. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 08:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Page 367 also shows the Humane Studies Review, an educational program of the Institute for Humane Studies. "The Institute for Humane Studies (IHS) is a libertarian[3][4] non-profit organization that offers educational and career programs"
That's not how Wikipedia works. The source needs to back up what is stated in the article, which an address doesn't do. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 21:28, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
That is exactly how Wikipedia works. The source shows an educational program of the organization, which supports the claim that the organization offers educational programs. I really don't know how else to explain this. --Abel (talk) 03:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
No, you still don't get it. Anyways, it's been removed by another user. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 08:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Lead section clogged with refs[edit]

The referencing of the lead section has gotten out of hand. Per WP:CITELEAD, a balance must be struck between the wish to provide the reader with proof, and the need to keep the article readable, with less clutter. Thus, we should "avoid redundant citations in the lead" section wherever possible. Note that the guideline says "The presence of citations in the introduction is neither required in every article nor prohibited in any article."

With this series of edits, Id4abel increased the number of references in the lead section from one to ten. Further changes have slapped more and more of them on until we have the current situation of 27 references, where none should be required. These references should be removed or at least moved to the article body. Binksternet (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Extreme POV Bias[edit]

The page seems to be written more like promotional propaganda than an actual source of information, is there any way to make it more neutral? Valendale (talk) 13:02, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Read WP:RS and WP:NPOV, and add statements supported by reliable sources with a different point of view. Let me know if you have any trouble. --Nbauman (talk) 15:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Institute for Humane Studies. 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:

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

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:48, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Institute for Humane Studies. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)