Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Conservatism

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

Blue flag waving.svg
WikiProject Conservatism
OOjs UI icon speechBubbles-ltr.svg
OOjs UI icon bell.svg
OOjs UI icon newspaper-rtl.svg
The Right Stuff
OOjs UI icon articleCheck-ltr.svg
OOjs UI icon italic-a.svg
OOjs UI icon ribbonPrize.svg
OOjs UI icon book-ltr.svg

Have a question? Just ask



Welcome to the Discussion page for WikiProject Conservatism. Here you can find discussions, notices, and requests for articles that deal with conservatism. If you would like to discuss, place a notice about, or if you have a request about, an article within the scope of this project, please include it here. Note that posting here in order to try to recruit editors with a particular political point of view is contrary to the intent of this project. Make sure to keep up-to-date on happenings at the project Watch


I'm trying to help create a more balanced view of Identitarianism. I've been edited out of existence two or three times, and now some progressives are trying very hard to edit the article to be a virtual mirror of Identitarian movement. I could use some help to flesh this article out, thanks. DavidBailey (talk) 03:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

What do you mean by "some progressives"? What is your view about the purpose of WikiProject Conservatism? O3000 (talk) 11:11, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I mean there are some who are making politically-motivated edits to the article because they disagree with it, while justifying their actions in Wikipedia beauracratic-speak. DavidBailey (talk) 13:13, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
WP:AGF. I see absolutely no evidence that any of the editors that you are debating with are doing anything of the kind. O3000 (talk) 13:15, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
And that's your opinion. Those who seek political balance (e.g. WP:NPOV) in an article might see it differently than you. Which is why I posted here. DavidBailey (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Ah, so now I am not interested in NPOV? And you came here specifically to WP:canvass "non-progressive" editors to counter what you perceive as a hotbed of progressives? O3000 (talk) 13:26, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Have you even bothered to view the article and edits in question? If it's not being edited completely out of existence by editors who disagree with the premise that identitarianism can mean anything other than white nationalism, it's having nearly all the content making these points stripped out of the article. So I'm not canvassing, I'm seeking people to help balance the article. e.g. WP:NPOV DavidBailey (talk) 14:17, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm curious why one would come to WikiProject Conservatism to gain a more balanced perspective instead of, say, WikiProject Sociology which the article is actually within the scope of. This project is for improving coverage of Conservatism-related topics; it's not meant to be a place to find conservative-minded editors. I would strongly discourage the use of this talk page for these canvassing activities. –dlthewave 14:38, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

As the Identitarian article states, it's a matter of sociology with strong links to political movements. I am not cavassing, I'm trying to get people who have non-progressive views to bring a political balance to the article. Those who were watching the Identitarian Movement article and now Identitarianism appear to be strong progressives in political views and seem unified in their desire to strip all non-progressive views of Identitarianism from the article. Perhaps it makes sense to tag the article with political categories as well as sociological ones as well. DavidBailey (talk) 16:13, 7 October 2018 (UTC) you're canvassing. You're specifically trying to get people with certain viewpoints to join the discussion, that's the definition of canvassing, messages sent with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way, and is considered inappropriate; you're trying to influence the discussion so it no longer has a consensus to remove the content; per Wikipedia:Canvassing#Inappropriate notification you're engaging in votestacking and campaigning, types of canvassing, by sending a non-neutral message to an audience you know is partisan Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:22, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Wrong. I'm trying to get anyone with any different viewpoints than those who are besieging the page right now. My goal is to create a page from a neutral point of view, not to espouse any particular one. I keep getting shut down by a small group of editors that all have the same point of view. DavidBailey (talk) 19:05, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
I have put a note at the article talk page, so that editors there will be aware of the posting here. I took a brief look at the talk there, and it looks as though there is a consensus among multiple editors, with DavidBailey the only editor who disagrees. I would also suggest that any request for editors to help with NPOV balance could be posted at WP:NPOVN. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
I made a request on WP:NPOVN. Thanks. DavidBailey (talk) 19:07, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism/LPOV[edit]

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism/LPOV

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conservatism/LPOV is an old neglected page, virtually never viewed, except for after being listed at MfD. Is it work fixing the perceived flaws? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:53, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Buck Sexton Article missing[edit]

I have no idea how his page got deleted, but Buck Sexton, host of the Buck Sexton Show, former host at TheBlaze, CNN political Analyst, CIA analyst, and current co-host of Rising on could someone help me fix this, much less popular people have articles.--MilkFghy (talk) 00:57, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

This project is about improving articles related to conservatism, not a club for conservatives. If you have come here in an attempt to overturn a community decision on an AfD, that would appear to be WP:CANVASSING. Such arguments can be stated in an AfD or an appeal to an AfD. O3000 (talk) 01:11, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
@MilkFghy: (edit conflict) First, no one has a page on Wikipedia; rather, Wikipedia has articles about people. Second, Wikipedians curate this encyclopedia and make decisions about what stays and what goes. For that reason, the article about Buck Sexton was deleted. Like most journalists and talking heads, Sexton created content but no one writes about Sexton. He is not, therefore, notable. The argument that there are articles about others is invalid. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Featured quality source review RFC[edit]

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Hawaii Tea Party for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hawaii Tea Party is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hawaii Tea Party until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --HighFlyingFish (talk) 22:05, 1 December 2018 (UTC)