| Revision as of 07:08, 16 May 2015 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,059 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Conservatism/Archive 12) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:33, 19 May 2015 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,059 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Conservatism/Archive 12) (botNext edit → | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
| <!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ --> | <!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ --> | ||
| <!-- WHEN ASSESSMENT COMPLETE ADD: {{DONE}}~~~~ --> | <!-- WHEN ASSESSMENT COMPLETE ADD: {{DONE}}~~~~ --> | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Hello. As a member of WP Conservatism, I am adding the WP tag to the talkpage of ], as I believe it is relevant to our project, in terms of the constitution and freedom of speech. I have been asked by editors on the article talkpage to censor my comment here, so I am censoring this right here. Thank you.] (]) 23:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Request help with Southern Strategy page == | == Request help with Southern Strategy page == | ||
Revision as of 06:33, 19 May 2015
| Main | Talk | Portal | Showcase | Assessment | Collaboration | Incubator | Guide | Newsroom | About Us | Commons |
| Skip to table of contents |
| WikiProject Conservatism talkpages (Dashboard) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project | |||||
| Interwiki | |||||
| Related | |||||
| |||||
| Welcome to the talk page for WikiProject Conservatism Here you can find discussions, notices, and requests for articles that in some way 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 do include it here. | Shortcut |
 | To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, all WikiProject Conservatism talk pages redirect here, except for The Right Stuff. |
 | Although it is very appropriate to post messages here asking for editing help or to inform about discussions concerning pages within the scope of this project, please 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, and may be regarded as a violation of the WP:Canvassing guideline. |
 | This project page was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
| This article was nominated for deletion review on 10 October 2014. The result of the discussion was Endorsement of Keep Closure for the (references page). |
 | This project does not extol any point of view, political or otherwise, other than that of a neutral documentarian. |
 view · edit Frequently asked questions
|
|
|
 | Conservatism Project‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Request assessment: New Labour, New Danger
It is requested that a member assess the quality and/or importance of the following article:
Page: New Labour, New Danger (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Requester: user:The C of E
Comments:
Request help with Southern Strategy page
Recently I have tried to add some descending views to the Southern Strategy article. I feel like the editors who are watching the article are very quick to try to tear down articles which refute the general thrust of the article but very tolerant of poorly referenced claims or articles that support the racist GOP plan hypothesis. I can understand that the editors with a particular bias (we all have biases so that is not meant as an attack) would be more likely to tend articles of interest to them. That said, I would appreciate any help that can be offered as I'm sure I'm not as good at navigating the world of wikipedia when compared to the other editors. This article was previously cited as being of concern and the article talk page makes that history clear. ] --Getoverpops (talk) 19:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton
Interested project members are welcome to join WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton, a collaborative project dedicated to improving Misplaced Pages articles related to HRC. Joining the project is in no way an endorsement of her or her political positions; in fact, it would be great to have people with a variety of political ideologies participating for the sake of NPOV. There are many articles to work on, and certainly she will be in the news for the foreseeable future, so thank you for your consideration. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:26, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Bandy ball
I am curious – this is funny – about why bandy ball was listed as a new article relevant to this project. :-) Snowsuit Wearer (talk|contribs) 19:04, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
RfD notification: Conservative news
Conservative news has been nominated at RfD. Your input at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 27#Conservative news would be appreciated. --BDD (talk) 13:06, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Request re-assessment for article, Carly Fiorina
I've been working on the article regarding Carly Fiorina over the last month, as well as making a few changes and improvements; but, I've also realized that this article is still marked as "low importance in the WikiProject Conservatism. It also has no such rating for WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Women writers. Yet, I've realized that as of April 2015 (especially) it has been intimated that Firorina will campaign for a 2016 GOP Presidential nomination, although it does not seem to be officially confirmed; meanwhile, the page currently says that she "actively seeking," which seems to be an adequate description, since she appears to be making strong and more visible talking points in the media. Despite criticism and many past failures in electoral politics, Fiorina is considered a main public figure and, if in any regards, a Vice Presidential possibility by some people's standards, as well as having a career as a conservative pundit. It is my belief that Fiorina should have a higher ranking than "low." In most of these Misplaced Pages projects, I believe she should at least be at the next level, "Mid-importance." Ca.papavero (talk) 04:34, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Request assessment: ]
It is requested that a member assess the quality and/or importance of the following article:
Page: Carly Fiorina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Requester: ]
Comments:
- Re-confirm my request from the section above. A few things have since happened; but, altogether not yet resolved. Especially for this project on Conservatism. Thanks! Ca.papavero (talk) 21:06, 4 May 2015 (UTC)