Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:CNSV)
Jump to: navigation, search
  Main   Talk   Portal   Showcase   Assessment   Collaboration   Incubator   Guide   Newsroom   About Us   Commons  

WikiProject Conservatism is a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to conservatism. You can learn more about us here. If you would like to help, please join the project, inquire on the talk page and see the to-do list below. Guidelines and other useful information can be found here.


Tasks

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
vieweditdiscusshistorywatch

Conservatism articles

Conservatism article rating and assessment scheme
(NB: Listing, Log & Stats are updated on a daily basis by a bot)
Daily log of status changes
Current Statistics
Index · Statistics · Log · Update


See also


Reports

Dashboard

Alerts

Categories for discussion
Redirects for discussion
Good article nominees
Requests for comments
Requested moves

Assessment log

April 26, 2017

Reassessed

  • Alphonso Jackson (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from C-Class to Stub-Class (rev · t).
  • Kenn Thomas (talk) reassessed. Quality rating changed from Unassessed-Class to Stub-Class (rev · t). Importance rating changed from Unknown-Class to Low-Class (rev · t).

Assessed

Removed

April 25, 2017

Reassessed

Assessed

Removed

April 1, 2017

Renamed

Reassessed

Assessed

Removed

February 3, 2017

Reassessed

Assessed

February 2, 2017

Reassessed

February 1, 2017

Reassessed

Requests for Comment


Talk:Conservative Party of Canada leadership election, 2017

Talk:Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect

Talk:2017 Stockholm attack

Talk:W56

Talk:First Cameron ministry

Talk:Day-care sex-abuse hysteria

Talk:Plummer v. State

Talk:Battle of Aleppo (2012–16)

Talk:List of organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups

Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

Talk:Genocide

Talk:International Justice Mission

Talk:Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal

Talk:Brandishing a firearm

Talk:Erik Prince

Talk:Catalan Countries

Talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

Talk:Protests against Donald Trump

Draft talk:US Presidents navbox

Talk:Office of Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement

Talk:Abkhazia

Talk:Erik Prince

Talk:Amin al-Husseini

Talk:Blue Army (Poland)

Talk:Gaslighting

Talk:John Fleming (American politician)

Talk:Anti-fascism

Talk:List of violent incidents in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2017

Talk:Lithuania


Deletion discussions


Conservatism

Hirsh Singh

Hirsh Singh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Hirsh Singh" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

WP:BLP of a person notable primarily as an as yet non-winning candidate in the primaries for a forthcoming election. As always, this is not in and of itself grounds for a Wikipedia article per WP:NPOL -- if you cannot demonstrate and reliably source that he was already notable enough for an article for some other reason before being a candidate in the primaries, then he has to win the election, not just run in it, to get an article because of the election per se. But this fails to demonstrate that he has the necessary preexisting notability; as written, it just consists of a single sentence stating that he exists, and is referenced entirely to routine coverage of his campaign announcement with no evidence of any coverage predating that. Bearcat (talk) 00:17, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete The article is so weak it does not identifiy his party. Being a winner of a major party nomination might be enough to show notability with lots of coverage, being a contender for the nomination at this stage is not enough at all to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:02, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. @Bearcat and Johnpacklambert: Found lots of sources. [5][6][7] even coverage from India [8][9] . Passes WP:NPOL point 2, WP:POLOUTCOMES final point, and basic WP:GNG. And Johnpacklambert, he is a Republican.--Mr. Guye (talk) 00:28, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Coverage of a person's candidacy in a primary contest is simply expected to always exist for all candidates, so it falls under WP:ROUTINE, and does not assist in building a case for inclusion per WP:GNG except in the extremely rare instance that it explodes into something on the order of the international media firestorm that swallowed Christine O'Donnell. Being able to show just five pieces of coverage of a primary candidate's campaign is not evidence that their candidacy is more notable than the norm — especially since (a) PRNewsWire is not a reliable source, but a press release distribution platform, meaning that his own campaign was the author of self-published "coverage" in the instance of link #1, and (b) IndiaWest and NewsIndia Times are not newspapers in India, but Indian-American ethnic community newspapers in the United States. So the scope of coverage being shown here is already three counts less impressive than you've presented it as being, before we've even gotten into why South Jersey Today and Shore News Network aren't strong sources either. (Hint on that last part: think about the rather large difference between "substantive coverage" and "blurb".) And what John Pack Lambert said in his comment is true as well: Singh is a Republican, but this article as written fails to say that. Bearcat (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 00:28, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 00:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 00:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment None of this rises above routine coverage expected of anyone running in an election. People who do not have the party nomination who are running for governor are not notable. The fact that passing mention of him occurs in far off press does not change that it is not above routine coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Mr. Guye (talk) 00:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Johnpacklambert This is reliable significant independent coverage. If this is routine for candidates for NJ Governor, maybe candidates for Governor should have some sort of intrinsic notability. But this passes GNG. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
By your method of counting virtually every candidate for political office would pass GNG. However the coverage in cases like this is short, episodic and routine at present, and just not enough to create a reliable article, plus it would lead us to creating way more articles than we could ever hope to adequately keep updated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:38, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Every single candidate in any election would always pass GNG if all you had to show to get them over GNG just for being a candidate was a few pieces of campaign coverage. That's not how NPOL works, however: in very nearly all cases they must either win the office or already have preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them an article anyway. The only way to get over GNG just on campaign coverage alone is to have that coverage explode to a volume far out of proportion what could be merely and routinely expected to exist for all candidates — like what happened to Christine O'Donnell — and the volume of coverage you've offered here is not approaching what it would take to pass that hurdle. Bearcat (talk) 00:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Campaign for Houston

Campaign for Houston (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Campaign for Houston" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference)

Organization not notable -- (probably) one of many supporting or opposing Proposition 1 in Houston, which was defeated. – S. Rich (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:35, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
@E.M.Gregory: – I quite agree with you. As this AfD has not attracted much comment, I will undertake a WP:BLAR in a few days. – S. Rich (talk) 05:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

New articles

User:AlexNewArtBot/ConservatismSearchResult. Page length= 60040

Other listings

Cleanup listing
Popular pages
Top edits watchlist
Hot Articles list (Top 20)

Related projects

WikiProject Conservatism is one of the Politics WikiProjects.

General Politics | Biography: Politics and government | Elections and Referendums | Law | Money and politics | Political parties | Voting Systems
Political culture Anarchism | Corporatism | Fascism | Oligarchy | Liberalism | Socialism
Social and political Conservatism | Capitalism | Libertarianism
Regional and national Australia | China | India | Japan | South Korea | New Zealand | Pakistan | United Kingdom | UK Parliament constituencies | US Congress | U.S. Supreme Court Cases

External links

  • This project on Commons Commons-logo.svg COM