This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why is it that at Wikipedia, the people who are the most aggressive about deleting other people's contributions, are typically the most ignorant about the subject in question? And that includes at least one administrator, who shall for obvious reasons remain nameless.
Again, why are we still including this? It seems to me the year is over, and there are no signs that it is shutting down. If there are still signs, show some new (credible) sources! ~ PHX-WIKI
If you think there are too many contributors listed in this article can I suggest you decide how many you want, pick the most notable ones, and delete the rest? Saying that the current names are grandfathered in but no new ones can be added is an arbitrary selection method. 70.20.108.19 ( talk) 01:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
There is a lot of confusion on the net. Something needs to be said about fact that Buchanan and Taki no longer affiliated wtih the American Conservative.-- DC-Paleo ( talk) 21:25, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
What is the source for the circulation figure of 8000? A quick search suggests that it is 12,000. [1] suggests that it is 15,000. Here I find 15-20,000.
Anyone have the straight dope?
Stealstrash ( talk) 08:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Changed to Wick Allison:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/a-conservative-for-obama/
Can't insert the references. Not a wiki master yet, I'm afraid. Stealstrash ( talk) 22:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on The American Conservative. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
The lede says the publication is nonpartisan, and then goes on to say it is devoted to conservative values. Is that contradictory? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:34, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
The organization/publication states that it exists to: promote a conservatism that opposes unchecked power in government and business; promote the flourishing of families and communities through vibrant markets and free people; and embrace realism and restraint in foreign affairs based on America's vital national interests.
After I split the sentence—these overloaded sentences are fairly common in Wikipedia, but they are ultimately hard to read, which is evident by how many problems are uncovered as soon as one splits them apart—the ambiguity between whether the organization (minor topic) or the publication (major topic) is promoting this mission statement. Probably one through the other, but unless the supplied citation actually says that, we should stick with what the citation says, and the leave the rest of the inference open.
And just so people know, I'm equally nonplussed with robotic talking adjectives on the other side of the aisle. Swamp creature, thy name is Puff the Vapid Adjective. — MaxEnt 20:10, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi all
Would it be accurate to describe The American Conservative as transphobic? What evidence would need to be provided to make a decision? Here is a selection of articles from their website which I would describe as very transphobic:
Thanks
John Cummings ( talk) 22:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Bimonthly is a very ambiguous word. It can mean either twice a month or once every two months. Instead of using the term bimonthly it would be better to use the term once every two months. 2607:9880:1090:BE:356F:53D0:FE39:8EB0 ( talk) 17:06, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why is it that at Wikipedia, the people who are the most aggressive about deleting other people's contributions, are typically the most ignorant about the subject in question? And that includes at least one administrator, who shall for obvious reasons remain nameless.
Again, why are we still including this? It seems to me the year is over, and there are no signs that it is shutting down. If there are still signs, show some new (credible) sources! ~ PHX-WIKI
If you think there are too many contributors listed in this article can I suggest you decide how many you want, pick the most notable ones, and delete the rest? Saying that the current names are grandfathered in but no new ones can be added is an arbitrary selection method. 70.20.108.19 ( talk) 01:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
There is a lot of confusion on the net. Something needs to be said about fact that Buchanan and Taki no longer affiliated wtih the American Conservative.-- DC-Paleo ( talk) 21:25, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
What is the source for the circulation figure of 8000? A quick search suggests that it is 12,000. [1] suggests that it is 15,000. Here I find 15-20,000.
Anyone have the straight dope?
Stealstrash ( talk) 08:42, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Changed to Wick Allison:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/a-conservative-for-obama/
Can't insert the references. Not a wiki master yet, I'm afraid. Stealstrash ( talk) 22:04, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on The American Conservative. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
The lede says the publication is nonpartisan, and then goes on to say it is devoted to conservative values. Is that contradictory? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:34, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
The organization/publication states that it exists to: promote a conservatism that opposes unchecked power in government and business; promote the flourishing of families and communities through vibrant markets and free people; and embrace realism and restraint in foreign affairs based on America's vital national interests.
After I split the sentence—these overloaded sentences are fairly common in Wikipedia, but they are ultimately hard to read, which is evident by how many problems are uncovered as soon as one splits them apart—the ambiguity between whether the organization (minor topic) or the publication (major topic) is promoting this mission statement. Probably one through the other, but unless the supplied citation actually says that, we should stick with what the citation says, and the leave the rest of the inference open.
And just so people know, I'm equally nonplussed with robotic talking adjectives on the other side of the aisle. Swamp creature, thy name is Puff the Vapid Adjective. — MaxEnt 20:10, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi all
Would it be accurate to describe The American Conservative as transphobic? What evidence would need to be provided to make a decision? Here is a selection of articles from their website which I would describe as very transphobic:
Thanks
John Cummings ( talk) 22:49, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Bimonthly is a very ambiguous word. It can mean either twice a month or once every two months. Instead of using the term bimonthly it would be better to use the term once every two months. 2607:9880:1090:BE:356F:53D0:FE39:8EB0 ( talk) 17:06, 30 March 2023 (UTC)