Talk:Ron Paul: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 17:00, 7 July 2007 editFeddhicks (talk \| contribs)200 edits →other article's tactics ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 14:00, 10 January 2025 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,091 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Ron Paul/Archive 11) (bot
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~skiptotoctalk~~}}		{{Skip to talk}}
	{{~~talkheader~~}}		{{Talk header}}
			{{Round in circles}}
	{{activepol\|Republican Presidential Candidate for the 2008 Election}}
			{{Not a forum}}
	{{WPBiography
			{{Article history
	\|living=yes
			\|action1=GAN
	\|class=B
			\|action1date=14:47, 17 August 2007
	\|priority=
			\|action1link=Talk:Ron Paul/Archive 4#GA Type out what GA means, you lazy fool
	\|listas=Paul, Ron
			\|action1result=listed
	\|small=yes}}
			\|action1oldid=151877763
	{{WikiProject U.S. Congress\|small=yes}}
	{{WikiProject Texas\|small=yes}}
	{{archive box\|] ] ] ]}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|maxarchivesize = 200K
	\|counter = 5
	\|algo = old(30d)
	\|archive = Talk:Ron Paul/archive%(counter)d
	}}

			\|action2=WAR
	== Austin Chronicle ==
			\|action2date=04:22, 21 August 2007
			\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Biography/A-class review/Ron Paul
			\|action2result=approved
			\|action2oldid=152601419

			\|action3=FAC
	Need to add that the Austin Chronicle has taken a much more sympathetic view of Ron Paul after 9/11 in view of his opposition to the war on terror and the PATRIOT act. Also probably need an article on the Austin Chronicle.
			\|action3date=04:16, 23 October 2007
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Ron Paul/archive1
			\|action3result=not promoted
			\|action3oldid=166369553

			\|action4=GAR
	== Opposition to Iran policy ==
			\|action4date=19:03, 18 January 2008
			\|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Ron Paul/1
			\|action4result=kept
			\|action4oldid=185238618

			\|action5=FAC
	I'm not very experienced at wiki-ing, so I'll just forward the link to Ron Paul's Iran speech in congress:
			\|action5date=03:17, 24 January 2008
			\|action5link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Ron Paul/archive2
			\|action5result=not promoted
			\|action5oldid=186493546

			\|action6=PR
	http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12640.htm
			\|action6date=14:45, 20 September 2008
			\|action6link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Ron Paul/archive1
			\|action6result=reviewed
			\|action6oldid=239304200

			\|action7=FAC
	Please include this in the article because it parallels his Iraq-war opposition.
			\|action7date=21:02, 17 November 2008
			\|action7link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Ron Paul/archive3
			\|action7result=not promoted
			\|action7oldid=252262504

			\|action8=GAR
	== Social issues? ==
			\|action8date=00:49, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
			\|action8link=Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Ron Paul/2
			\|action8result=delisted
			\|action8oldid=1018451062

			\|topic=Socsci
	I Was watching people get all exited over this guy on ], and his economic ideas seem nice, but mysteriously, there doesn't seem to be anything here about his views on social things, like Abortion and whatnot. I don't actually know his views on those kinds of things, which is why i'm bringing it up here, because it seems like a hole in coverage in this article that'd be nice to fill. ] 16:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
			\|currentstatus=DGA
			\|otd1date=2017-08-20\|otd1oldid=796439095
			}}
			{{Afd-merged-from\|Daily Paul\|Daily Paul\|04 October 2011}}
			{{Afd-merged-from\|American Sovereignty Restoration Act\|American Sovereignty Restoration Act (2nd nomination)\|03 July 2009}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell \|blp=yes \|collapsed=yes \|class=C\|listas=Paul, Ron\|1=
			{{WikiProject Biography \|politician-work-group=yes \|politician-priority=High}}
			{{WikiProject Pennsylvania\|importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject U.S. Congress\|importance=High\|subject=person}}
			{{WikiProject United States\|importance=High\|TX=yes\|TX-importance=high\|USPE=yes\|USPE-importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject Houston}}
			{{WikiProject Anti-war\|importance=Mid}}
			{{WikiProject Politics\|importance=Low\|libertarianism=yes\|libertarianism-importance=high\|American=yes\|American-importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Skepticism\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Alternative views\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Business\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Economics\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Taxation}}
			{{WikiProject International relations\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Pittsburgh\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Conservatism\|importance=Mid}}
			}}
			{{Annual readership}}
			{{Contentious topics/talk notice\|topic=blp}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 200K
			\|counter = 11
			\|algo = old(180d)
			\|minthreadsleft = 2
			\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
			\|archive = Talk:Ron Paul/Archive %(counter)d
			}}

			{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn \|target=Talk:Ron Paul/Archive index \|mask=Talk:Ron Paul/Archive <#> \|leading_zeros=0 \|indexhere=no \|template=}}
	Ron Paul's position on many issues, including abortion, is that the federal government should leave it to the individual states to decide.] 23:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
	:Actually, I believe he is pro-life. --] 21:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
	:It's a little more nuanced than that. He believes that abortion is wrong, but that the Constitution does not give Congress the authority to rule on it. He becomes definitely pro-life at the individual state level, so if a referendum were raised in Texas to ban abortion, he would vote for it as an individual. He would vote against a similar law in Congress, for a perceived lack of jurisdiction in the matter. ] 14:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

			{{Press
			\| subject = article
			\| author = Kyle Perisic
			\| title = Misplaced Pages listed Ron Paul on 'white supremacists' list for three weeks before removing him
			\| org = '']''
			\| url = http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/25/wikipedia-ron-paul-white-supremacist/
			\| date = July 26, 2018
			\| quote = A Misplaced Pages editor placed one of the most influential libertarian Republicans on a list of “American White Supremacists” for three weeks before it was removed Wednesday.
			\| accessdate = July 26, 2018
			}}

			== Use of the words fiscal policy to describe opinions on the federal reserve instead of monetary policy ==
	Ron Paul does not believe this is up to the states, the above is false. He has repeatedly submitted H.R. 2597 which states: Life begins at conception, each state has the authority to protect lives, and the Supreme Court cannot review this. If life begins at conception at the federal level, it is murder to commit an abortion, even with a morning after pill. How can this be interpreted? How would it not be murder under this definition? The line "each state has authority to protect lives of unborn children" is misleading. They will have to, according to this bill. Ron is not as neutral as he'd have you believe. ] 07:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	:You are correct he is pro-life and does not belive this is up to the states but he never says he is neutral he has always said his is conservative ] 07:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Ron Paul Library ==

	A new online library has been created that indexes more than 500 documents written by Ron Paul. This is a great resource for those wishing to know more about Ron Paul's position on various topics. Add to external links?



	== Ron Paul Interview ==

	Congressman Ron Paul appears in a longer interview ca 35 mins into this video from mises institute

	http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-466210540567002553&q=Federal+Reserve

	this should be helpful for anyone who needs information to improve any section on his economic views and policies.<br />
	- cheers! -- ndg.

	== Controversial Racial Remarks ==

	There is only one source for this section where allegedly something which could have been considered racist relates to Ron Paul; hence it's a misnomer to call this a controversy. Furthermore, with only one source citing remarks and no sources citing Ron Paul as a racist, it constitutes original research on the part of wikipedia editors to claim that there are controversial racial remarks. The section needs to be deleted lest we run afoul of BLP guidelines and original research guidelines. On top of that, Ron Paul's cited political position with respect to racism need to be moved to the page which cites his platform and other positions. It doesn't belong here.

	Not one noted political pundit or editor or news program has declared any kind of controversy exists or that Ron Paul has even been accused of being a racist or saying anything which has been definitely declared as racist. Until such time, the section constitutes original research, since Misplaced Pages editors are the ones calling the speech racist. ] 10:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

	:I think that is probably right. WP:BLP does require multiple, independent sources for such controversial claims. This isn't a libel issue ''per se'' since Paul is a public figure, but I think the WP:BLP policy is about more than just potential libel liability. ] 23:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

	::Ron Paul himself acknowledges the controversy in the Texas Monthly magazine interview - this is in no way original research. <strong>] </strong>\|<small>]</small> 05:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
	:::The word "controversy" is not used by Ron Paul... he doesn't say anything describing it. "minor sensation"; "racially tinted remarks"; "controversy" are used by the magazine itself. ''Texas Monthly'' is referring to it as a controversy in the context of the original election, when he had not yet issued a denial; they don't refer to it as that way afterwards.--] 19:08, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

	::::I just wanted to note that the current description (which I'm changing now) of the 'controversy' doesn't actually mention anything he said. Perhaps 'controversy' is an inappropriate description, but it's an issue nonetheless. One that doesn't seem to be treated fairly. Rather, it includes explanations on Ron Paul's behalf with regard to the comments, but little discussion of the nature of the 'sensation'. Perhaps the entire section ought to be deleted (though I don't think so), but it's also unfair to simply cite the source of the controversy and then provide Ron Paul's arguments to discredit the issue. ] 09:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

	: I believe the "alleged racist remarks" section is being given <b>undue weight</b>. We had a good discussion of Barack Obama's financial relationship with Tony Rezko on the ] article, and it was decided that to give the controversy proper weight it should be mentioned within the footnotes (something on which I agree). I <b>propose</b> the same here. There appears to be a notable controversy about the alleged racist remarks but it is given the same weight as his 1988 campaign for the Presidency (which is ridiculous). I ask anyone to explain why this controversy needs a full section (not to mention 3 paragraphs of it). Best regards. ] 18:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

	::You are completely right. I originally wrote up a short 3-5 sentence paragraph on the topic, which apparently angered his fans. In what I suspect was an attempt to obfuscate the allegations, they put in paragraphs of defense and hearsay, and even removed the actual allegations in the process. Then a few other editors got involved, putting them back in and adding more information on what he said. In the end, to make everyone happy, we have the mess of a section before us. Good luck fixing it, you will have several angry editors quickly changing whatever you do to it. ] 20:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
	:::I believe it was ] who moved the quotes to the footnotes... The allegations are still there, in the first paragraph of the section. Jogurney, how would the situation be handled by putting it in the footnotes? I may take a look at the Obama article to see.---] 02:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

	::::I propose restoring the previous version of this section with the quotes left in the footnotes to avoid given them undue weight (compared to other sections such as his Congressional career). I believe ] created a nice way to deal with this here: (similar to how the Obama-Rezko controversy is handled in the Obama article). Hopefully, this version will reduce the amount of blanking of that section. Best regards. ] 16:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

	:::::As I follow up, I blanked the other accusations of racism section since it is redundant. I don't think we need a second mention of the controversy (and out of order). Best regards. ] 16:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
	::::::Good catch. I restored a version close to Tvoz's of above that should be good; we may need to lock the article to keep the vandals away because it's annoying to constantly restore that section to the article.--] 01:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Racism Section Constitutes Original Research ==

	The racism section amounts to a political hit piece on Ron Paul. It constitutes original research, since Ron Paul has never been accused of being a racist or of making racist comments. An article citing comments which no one outside of wikipedia editors has even claimed are racist comments does not warrant a section on the topic. Now if some editor can provide a source which calls Ron Paul a racist or claims he made racist comments, then that is another matter; however, to date no such source exist, and the interpretation of those comments as racist speech is being made solely by wikipedia editors and thus constitutes original research. ] 08:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
	:I changed the title of the section and reworded a sentence. The ''Houston Chronicle'' article did not say anything about being a racist or quote anyone saying the same. There were some blog posts on the Daily Kos and Wonkette saying that, but the text as printed was not exactly right because the word "racist" was not used in the original Houston Chron article. Since this did get mainstream attention from blogs and the like, it is appropriate to include it-- the section includes the allegations and presents a fair view of them.---] 10:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

	Actually Ron Paul has publicly made racist statements If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be
	http://www.latestpolitics.com/blog/2007/05/ron-pauls.html

	This is not Ron Pauls election campaign page. Stop editing it to support his election campaign. ] 10:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)michaelh613

	That is included in the section on the racial remarks, and he has denied writing that. Michaelh613-- please stop editing the page to support his opponent's election campaign :) Neutrality is what's called for in this article and on Misplaced Pages.--] 01:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Article Bias ==

	This article suffers from deep bias in support of the candidate.

	You suffer from deep political bias and ignorance. The article is factual.

	This discussion suffers from a lack of signing so start ] 06:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

	:Agreed. Anonymous users: when you say that there is a bias, please give specific examples, and feel free to edit the article yourself.--] 23:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

	::This article is very fair. I've read nothing biased, if you do so, please cite it. ] 00:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
	:::The glowing quote from that judge is pure glurge. I'd remove it, but I'd be insulting the honor of every Internet tough guy's favorite candidate.
	::::What is "glurge"? ---] 17:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

	Please sign your comments with four tildes if you make a comment.--] 22:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

	I think what concerns some users isn't anything specific, but the general tone of the article. Compared to other candidates' pages, I would say this entry seems more positive in favor of the candidate. But its not because the editors intended it be a glowing endorsement. I think it has to do with a lack of critical sources to cite. Ron Paul receives little criticism in the press, so its hard to find opposition to his message. With few direct rebuttals from respected media sources, and with hardly any constructive rebuttals from other outlets (like blogs), his message appears to have more validity than his opponents'. At least that's how I see it. ] 01:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

	Just added back information on Ron Pauls election challengers with gloriemarie removed and attacked me on my talk back page claiming it was bias. The FACT he has people running against him was completely sourced. If she does this again she should be banned from editing this site. We need to protect this article from Ron Paul internet activists to keep the site reliable. Wikis not part of his campaign. ] 10:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)michaeh613

	I attacked no one on any talk page and I only said to please stop making persistent non-neutral edits after I saw that many other editors had asked you to do the same on many other articles. Please stop calling for the banning of users who make useful contributions to Misplaced Pages.--] 01:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Origins of Internet Meme ==

	It seems like the Ron Paul internet meme (or whatever that is) is as popular as the O'RLY Owl and LolCats (both are hobbies of fat people who have no life). What is the historical account on this popularity?
	:Please sign your comments with four tildes. I'm not sure what you're referring to, you'll have to elaborate.--] 21:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
	I think he's asking for a short "history" of how Ron Paul became so popular online.] 03:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

	He's popular online because he's popular with people that actually research him, something you can't do with FOX news and CNN. ] 12:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

	I agree. But I think there's more to it than that. His message resonates with many internet users. A lot of them have a somewhat libertarian outlook, which Ron Paul shares. Ron Paul also stands firm against any regulation or taxation of the internet, something this crowd likes to hear. And as Virek said, those who actually research the current Republican candidates often find themselves aligning with a "second tier" candidate. ] 08:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Please Re-Word ==

	''Since the debate, Ron Paul and his position have also been defended by Lew Rockwell, Pat Buchanan, Accuracy in Media, and other conservative and libertarian as well as more liberal commentators, including Bill Maher, Joy Behar on ABC's The View.''
	I can't put my finger on it, but something makes this sentence sound very awkward - especially the end. Can someone please re-word this? --] 18:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

	the problem is that "and other conservative and libertarian , as well as more..."] 00:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Article losing focus ==

	I feel this article is losing focus in a major way. It is supposed to be about Ron Paul the person, but more and more of the article seems to be devoted to other people's opinions of Paul instead. The Election and Internet popularity sections in particular offer very little concrete information about the person himself. As for the Election section, most of that information should be put in its relevant subpage, but a lot of it is spilling over into this one instead. I'd urge everyone to begin scaling this material back and showing more restraint while editing. We'll never make it to good or featured article status like this.--] 02:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

	:I pared down the intro to the Presidential campaign section yesterday, took out some of those opinions and moved them to the Presidential campaign page and I think it's a lot better after that. I feel there are also getting to be a lot of pictures which distract from the text. Do you have any other concrete suggestions? The first and third debate sections could also be shipped over to the Presidential campaign page and the second debate section summarized... I do believe that the second debate incident should be included since that is what he has gotten a lot of attention for, probably more than anything else he's ever done. I'll try to work on it a bit.--] 10:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

	::I just took an axe to it big time. Hopefully it stays lean this time.--] 19:02, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
	:::I did like the ''American Conservative'' cover, though. Don't you think it would still work in that section? Or, at least some picture, it seems so bare now.--] 05:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

	== Essay archives, etc. ==

	I reverted a change that removed external links to archives of essays published under Ron Paul's name. There is no reason why these archives (whose counterparts are certainly linked at other articles) should not be included for the reader's reference. It isn't as though the article, in the encyclopedic voice, is asserting anything that violates ]. The encyclopedia should like to publicly available work by Paul that would allow readers to further explore the positions Paul has taken in the past. ] 18:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
	:Misplaced Pages is not an indiscriminate collection of weblinks. ]. People may use google themselves. Besides all his works must be easily available from his presidential campaign website. Also pease be advised that linking from youtube, myspace, etc., is strongly discouraged in wikipedia. `'] 19:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
	::He didn't say he was linking YouTube or Myspace-- I have restored the links to these archives of articles. An archive of speeches or articles are exactly what external links are designed for and is very encyclopedic. There is nothing commercial on the sites, and they are collections of Ron Paul's words. Yes, Misplaced Pages is not an indiscrimate collection of weblinks, I don't believe anyone is going to argue with that; however, that doesn't mean that informative links should be excluded because Google should be used instead-- that's a disservice to readers of Misplaced Pages. "Besides all his works must be easily available from his presidential campaign website." No, they are not. Lew Rockwell publishes many essays by Paul that only appear on that site. --] 05:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
	== Newsletter section on race ==

	Was this deleted or integrated into the article or moved somewhere? ] 16:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Born in Green Tree, Pennsylvania? ==

	Several sources show that Paul was born in Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, Pa - not Green Tree, Pennsylvania (southwest of Pittsburgh)
	http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=P000583
	Is there a way we could verify this?

	== Reliable source ==

	A large portion of the article is based on this source which is written by his wife on his website. This is not a reliable source. I propose that material that is sourced solely on his wife's article be removed from the article.--] 06:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

	Only the personal and family information, nothing else, and I would not term it as a "large portion". If that information is all taken out, the article is not as good and has almost nothing on his personal life. I'd say that his wife is a reliable source for facts on his background and their family life, etc.-- nothing but information on their family is taken from that article. That section is neutral and just lists colleges attended, etc. is also not run by him, although the article originally appeared on his campaign website, I believe.--] 01:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	:The article loses significant credibility when it has sections based entirely on the unreliable sources. Please read ]. It states "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." How is his wife a third party source?--] 12:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	== He opposes what? ==

	"He is strongly Pro-Life and opposes abortion, gay marriage, the Federal income tax on individuals, the Federal Reserve, foreign intervention, capital punishment, and the war on drugs." -- That makes it sound like he's against abortion, gay marriage, etc, which isn't true. I think this needs to be reworded.] 09:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

	I took that whole paragraph out because it simply reiterated what was already said in the summary and, as you wrote, gave a misleading impression.--] 01:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Neutrality ==

	In several parts of this article there are facts that are not terribly relevant to the biography; they seem to be more propaganda. This may or may not be related to all of the Ron Paul supporters who have been spamming other user-content-submitted sites such as Digg and Facebook.
	] 15:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

	:Can you be a bit more specific so those parts can be fixed or eliminated ] 17:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

	== Archive ==

	I feel we should archive some of this page I say anything over 2 months old anyone disagree? ] 18:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
	:'''Agree''' Getting far too long. ] 23:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
	::2 months old still leaves this to long I'm changing it to 30 days ] 06:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	== "alleged" added to Sudan's human rights violations ==

	TO those adding the word "alleged" to the phrase "Sudan's human rights violations": who alleges that Sudan isn't committing these acts? If there is a legitimate debate, then site it. Otherwise, don't add unnecessary weasel language... ] 23:11, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	:The other side on the Darfur issue refers to it as a Civil War. I can provide a few articles by libertarian opinion website ]. A Google search of this site turns up 59 results critical of intervention in Darfur and not referring to it as a "genocide" or "human rights violations." A search of the ] ] website also turns up many articles critical of that viewpoint on Darfur. There definitely isn't a consensus that a genocide or human rights violations are occuringn in the Sudan. ] 23:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

	::I'm pretty sure human rights violations can occur during wars.--] 04:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	:::My question to Mr. Life, Liberty, Property (nice name, guy) still stands: who says that Sudan ISN'T violating human rights in Darfur? Now, I think I need to restore this entire subject which has mysteriously been deleted.

	] 13:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

	== This thing reads like an ad ==

	"As a Republican, he has represented Texas's 14th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1997 and represented Texas's 22nd district in 1976 and from 1979 to 1985. He has earned the nickname "Dr. No" because he is a medical doctor who votes against any bill he believes violates the Constitution. In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Paul is the "one exception to the Gang of 535" on Capitol Hill. He has never voted to raise taxes or congressional pay and refuses to participate in the congressional pension system or take government-paid junkets. He voted against the USA PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the Iraq War."

			Hi all,
	i guess mr paul has his congressional aids working overtime to make him look good.
	] 03:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

			First timer here. Maybe nitpicking but in macro-economic courses that I took (Econ and math major) I was taught that the federal reserve's interest rate manipulation, open-market operations etc. were examples of monetary policy, not fiscal policy. I understand fiscal policy to be more the tool of congress i.e. changing taxes or spending money to stimulate the economy. I believe articles on fiscal vs monetary policy should support this.
	:I'm leaning towards removing or relocating the "Dr. No" and William Simon quotes.--] 04:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

			This is in one of the first paragraphs in the introduction section, which I guess I can't edit. Language would be much more precise if it were to be changed imho. ] (]) 05:32, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
	== Official External links deleted/put back ==

			:You are correct. I edited this sentence accordingly. <span class="nowrap">–]</span> (] • ]) 14:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
	Several days age I put the official links back in place after they had been deleted. They have been reprioritized and btter descriptions added given the quick changing, online nature of the Ron Paul 2008 Presidential Campaign. Please do not be destructive or revert these links to the previous non-descriptive listing. ] 13:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
			::No, I didn't put my comments about unsourced materials here! They appeared separately in original. ] (]) 01:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

			== Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. == I apologize for putting this in the text rather than as a footnote. I haven't edited since Edward Snowden. That article received so much partisan argument as well as deletion of sourced facts that I gave up. I've forgotten how to exactly insert footnotes in text about "Needs source."
	==other article's tactics==
	The ] article has a description of the Rezko house purchase controversy under "personal" life but it is hidden in the footnotes and in extremely small print. There is no mention of the controversy in the article, just a footnote.

			Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, national "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. ] (]) 01:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
	In the Ron Paul article, there is mention of the Barbara Jordan controversy and further explanation in the footnotes. It is also longer than the 1 sentence used in Obama.

			== Unsourced claims about delegates at the RNC 2008, 2012, and results of national elections. ==
	Should the article use the same tactic and remove the Barbara Jordan mention in the main article and hide it in the footnotes as a 1 sentence summary and then put it in tiny print (like the tactic used in Obama)?

			Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. == I apologize for noting this in the text of the article, rather than as a footnote.this in the text rather than as a footnote. I haven't edited since Edward Snowden. That article received so much partisan argument as well as deletion of sourced facts that I gave up. I've forgotten how to exactly insert footnotes in text about "Needs source." ] (]) 01:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
	Or should the Obama article be more honest? I did not think of this, SteveDufour gets credit for it as explained in the Barack Obama talk page.
	] 16:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:00, 10 January 2025

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ron Paul article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 6 months

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Ron Paul. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Ron Paul at the Reference desk.

Ron Paul was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 17, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
August 21, 2007	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
October 23, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
January 18, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept
January 24, 2008	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
September 20, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
November 17, 2008	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 21, 2021	Good article reassessment	Delisted
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 20, 2017.
Current status: Delisted good article

Daily Paul was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 04 October 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Ron Paul. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

American Sovereignty Restoration Act was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 03 July 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Ron Paul. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance).

Pennsylvania Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

U.S. Congress High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) person(s).

United States: Presidential elections / Texas High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as High-importance).

Houston (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Houston, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.HoustonWikipedia:WikiProject HoustonTemplate:WikiProject HoustonHouston

Anti-war Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anti-war, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the anti-war movement on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anti-warWikipedia:WikiProject Anti-warTemplate:WikiProject Anti-warAnti-war
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American / Libertarianism Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Libertarianism portal This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as High-importance).

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative views Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Taxation (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation

International relations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pittsburgh Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pittsburgh and its metropolitan area on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Mid‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Misplaced Pages. 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, 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.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Kyle Perisic (July 26, 2018). "Misplaced Pages listed Ron Paul on 'white supremacists' list for three weeks before removing him". The Daily Caller. Retrieved July 26, 2018. A Misplaced Pages editor placed one of the most influential libertarian Republicans on a list of "American White Supremacists" for three weeks before it was removed Wednesday.

Use of the words fiscal policy to describe opinions on the federal reserve instead of monetary policy

Hi all,

First timer here. Maybe nitpicking but in macro-economic courses that I took (Econ and math major) I was taught that the federal reserve's interest rate manipulation, open-market operations etc. were examples of monetary policy, not fiscal policy. I understand fiscal policy to be more the tool of congress i.e. changing taxes or spending money to stimulate the economy. I believe articles on fiscal vs monetary policy should support this.

This is in one of the first paragraphs in the introduction section, which I guess I can't edit. Language would be much more precise if it were to be changed imho. 2601:586:5280:EEB0:303D:85BB:6EF8:B46E (talk) 05:32, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

You are correct. I edited this sentence accordingly. –CWenger (^ • @) 14:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

No, I didn't put my comments about unsourced materials here! They appeared separately in original. Leslynjd (talk) 01:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

== Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. == I apologize for putting this in the text rather than as a footnote. I haven't edited since Edward Snowden. That article received so much partisan argument as well as deletion of sourced facts that I gave up. I've forgotten how to exactly insert footnotes in text about "Needs source."

Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, national "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. Leslynjd (talk) 01:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Unsourced claims about delegates at the RNC 2008, 2012, and results of national elections.

Unsourced claims about number of delegates at the 2008 Republican National Conventions and the results of the subsequent elections. Without sources, "popularity" is an opinion, not a fact. == I apologize for noting this in the text of the article, rather than as a footnote.this in the text rather than as a footnote. I haven't edited since Edward Snowden. That article received so much partisan argument as well as deletion of sourced facts that I gave up. I've forgotten how to exactly insert footnotes in text about "Needs source." Leslynjd (talk) 01:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Categories: