This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've reverted a redirect to George Mason University, not so much because I think this entity deserves a separate article (I'd want to see arguments on that), but because the appropriate action if this entity does not deserve it's own article is to propose merging this article into that one, get feedback, and only then to create a redirect.
I also might not have objected if the contents of this article had been added into the George Mason University article, but that wasn't done. No attempt was made to do so; in fact, the GMU article still had (and has) a wikilink to this article, which thus became a circular link. John Broughton | ♫ 02:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
These two lines seem to be taken straight from the New Yorker article, and don't seem to stand alone well without more information/context:
This seems to include some synthesis of ideas from a somewhat biased source.
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mercatus Center. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
To paraphrase MacLean, Mercatus is widely considered a stealth political lobbying front hiding as a tax write off for the Kochs. They produce mostly propaganda and disinformation in an attempt to deliberately undermine democracy in the United States and to promote capitalism in its place. The article lacks a fair assessment of this organization and its absurd and almost impenetrable mission statement: "to generate knowledge and understanding of the institutions that affect the freedom to prosper, and to find sustainable solutions that overcome the barriers preventing individuals from living free, prosperous, and peaceful lives." This organization has never generated a single piece of useful or applicable knowledge nor has it any time proposed a "sustainable solution". In fact, it has produced a body of alternate facts and problematic policies that are completely and totally unsustainable. We are dealing with another right wing whitewashing, as this article fails to properly portray this "think tank" based on our best reliable sources. Viriditas ( talk) 01:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've reverted a redirect to George Mason University, not so much because I think this entity deserves a separate article (I'd want to see arguments on that), but because the appropriate action if this entity does not deserve it's own article is to propose merging this article into that one, get feedback, and only then to create a redirect.
I also might not have objected if the contents of this article had been added into the George Mason University article, but that wasn't done. No attempt was made to do so; in fact, the GMU article still had (and has) a wikilink to this article, which thus became a circular link. John Broughton | ♫ 02:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
These two lines seem to be taken straight from the New Yorker article, and don't seem to stand alone well without more information/context:
This seems to include some synthesis of ideas from a somewhat biased source.
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mercatus Center. 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.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
To paraphrase MacLean, Mercatus is widely considered a stealth political lobbying front hiding as a tax write off for the Kochs. They produce mostly propaganda and disinformation in an attempt to deliberately undermine democracy in the United States and to promote capitalism in its place. The article lacks a fair assessment of this organization and its absurd and almost impenetrable mission statement: "to generate knowledge and understanding of the institutions that affect the freedom to prosper, and to find sustainable solutions that overcome the barriers preventing individuals from living free, prosperous, and peaceful lives." This organization has never generated a single piece of useful or applicable knowledge nor has it any time proposed a "sustainable solution". In fact, it has produced a body of alternate facts and problematic policies that are completely and totally unsustainable. We are dealing with another right wing whitewashing, as this article fails to properly portray this "think tank" based on our best reliable sources. Viriditas ( talk) 01:00, 23 June 2022 (UTC)