Talk:1776 Commission - Knowledge (XXG)

1623:

Review, which similarly leans right, has published material saying that "While CNN’s attack was silly, it was expected. The New York Times, however, had the temerity to complain that 'no professional historians,' only 'conservative activists, politicians and intellectuals,' authored the report. First of all, Victor Davis Hanson has a Ph.D. in classics from Stanford University, and has written numerous excellent histories; Larry Arnn, the chair of the project, has a Ph.D. in government; Carol Swain, the co-vice chair, has a Ph.D. in political science; Matthew Spalding, the executive director, has a Ph.D. in government, and so on." There is currently no consensus on the reliability of the National Review, but there is marginal consensus that the Washington Times

831: 1047: 807: 2160:, I understand from your edit summary that made the changed ("it does include citations to primary source documents Federalist 2 and Federalist 10, so it isn't true that it "does not include citations") but that you disagree with the source material isn't really material — we rely on the RS to make these judgment calls, not us. (Also, I would disagree with you that references to two primary source documents are the same as "citations" in the academic sense. These sorts of judgment calls are exactly why we rely on the reliable, secondary sources.) Pinging 704: 669: 641: 855: 714: 355: 565: 538: 450: 429: 575: 887: 2596:. That seems like a strange choice. I guess you think calling the report's critics "professional" and "specialists" is gives them some legitimacy and objectivity. I think the use of "US Historians" in this context is most apt. And thinking about the word "mainstream" (my thought about lending some creditable to US historians) is unnecessary. US Historians, who are actually historians, have creditability 345: 324: 2401: 2294: 1239: 977: 1313:

are not. He holds a Ph.D in classics and his military history expertise is in ancient wars. Your claim that VDH is "one of the most prominent, living US military historians" desperately needs a citation, or at the very least, this deep clarification. Perusing VDH's bibliography, I see no evidence "that he is widely published as a professional historian of US history in general."

2187:. If we can find alternative sources (the AHA source that I added in the membership section seems to be sufficiently independent, as does the Forbes source), then we should go with that. The change in refs was accidental, and was overlooked as I attempted to resolve a merge conflict; that was my bad. I'm a bit inexperienced here, so I don't fully understand the full scope of 293: 460: 264: 230: 2369: 2450: 1693:

experts when the reliable sources make clear that they aren't. Your edit to the lead which removed the line that there is "not a single professional historian of the United States" on the committee and replaced it with your original research that the "Composition of the committee has been a subject of controversy" is not an improvement.

2784:

My edit changing "overwhelmingly criticized" (in the lead section) to "largely criticized" was reverted. Washington Post, one of the two sources cited in that section, states "Historians largely condemned it, saying it was filled with errors and partisan politics." The New York Times likewise did not

2603:

Of course, the familiar term for "professional history specialist", is "historian". Clearly "professional history specialist" falls under the field of scholarship (another word that implies "professionalism") of "US Historian". "US Historian" used alone indicates the specialization that is most apt,

2084:

There seems to be a lot of interest in this article, which is about a notable but short-lived topic. Obviously, there's still some back and forth needing to worked out, but once activity has settled a bit, are there any editors who would be interested in nominating this entry for Good article status?

1474:

It's anyone's guess how the NYT has decided to define a "professional historian" here, but certainly Hanson is without question a paid, professional historian by any—and Knowledge (XXG)'s—definition. And there's no benefit in including such a dubious claim here. We can simply point out that there has

2329:

that established the “commission”. The “report” was already publicly disseminated by the commission as directed in Sec 2(c)(i) of the previous executive order. The new administration has chosen not to carry out its recommendations, but there is no way to “remove” or “withdraw” something from the

1296:

The article's assertion is still incorrect. Victor Davis Hanson is one of the most prominent, living US military historians, and his title expressly states "US Military Historian" at Hillsdale College. This alone would qualify him and therefore disqualify the over-reaching assertion in question; the

936:

page word for word, considering how overwhelming the historians backlash has been. But since many users would prefer to go the other way, then if we are going to list the universities(and not their names) then we should list every university from which each historian is at. To say it's "a group of

2788:

The lead sentence clearly relies on the Washington Post characterization by quoting the "errors and partisan politics" part, so using the word "largely" would better reflect the source, whereas using "overwhelming" was less accurate. From a simple search I did not identify other major sources cited

2554:

Under the contents section there really isn't a lot of specific information, and it is written in an inflammatory way. After reading this, I'm more confused than when I began. Any chance we can be more specific on what the commission actually states? Is it simply trying to conserve the history that

2499:

Seriously? You believe that "The report itself was designed to act as a guide to sitting presidents on the governance of the country." This "report" isn't a guide by any stretch of the imagination. In any case, if a person needs a 45-page pamphlet as a guide in order to understand how to "sit" as a

1692:

That is an op-ed in the LA Times. No one is disputing that the committee included people who have PhDs and have worked in academia. But the thing is that a classicist is not a "historian of the United States". It's misleading to readers to suggest that the folks on this committee are subject matter

1397:

This seems a little unclear. Is it saying the 1619 project received negative reviews from historians or the 1776. One of the sources cited is from The Federalist (a conservative media outlet) that critiques the 1619 project while the rest of the sources critique the 1619 project so it seems like it

1312:

We have multiple sources which clearly discuss that the panel included no professional historians who focus on United States history. That VDH might have written some books which touch on United States history does not mean his training and experience are in United States history - and indeed, they

2599:

However, calling them "professional specialists" is getting a bit far afield and somewhat vague. (What will readers think when they run across the unusual term of "professional specialist" in this context (like I did)?) Maybe "professional US History specialists" would be better, but that is still

2346:

Finally, why is there a link to an archive.org copy of the pdf in the “External Links” section? It links to a page that embeds the pdf along with some politically biased metadata and commentary. There are better sources for an archived PDF, most notably the one that is already embedded at the

2191:

as it pertains to this issue, but I don't know in what way simply viewing the source text is considered to be original research. Does original research mean referring to the content primary source documents and plainly saying what it says, or does it mean conducting novel background research and

1622:

which though it does have a partisan bent, has published material indicating that "the 16-member commission was diverse in the widest sense of the familiar adjective. It included historians, lawyers, academics, scholars, authors, former elected officials and past public servants." The National

2431:

The 1776 commission reports opening paragraph reads: "In the course of human events there have always been those who deny or reject human freedom, but Americans will never falter in defending the fundamental truths of human liberty proclaimed on July 4, 1776. We will—we must—always hold these

1507:

Larry P. Arnn has limited credentials regarding Churchill. His academic credentials are in government, though someone has added uncited claims of his having studied "international history" and "modern history" to his wikipedia page (intriguing). It appears the NYT filed him as "conservative

2520:

What source says that it is its purpose? If you're proposing to cite the document itself, a page number or section title would be helpful. The quote you provided doesn't say anything about being "a guide to sitting presidents." Rather, the text itself says it was written

1053:

The article merely states "According to the executive order establishing the commission, the commission's goal is to end what it calls the "radicalized view of American history" which has "vilified Founders and founding"." There's no specific "white supremacy" mention.

1966:

It's called the 1776 report because it was published by the 1776 Commission, which has the stated purpose of enabling "a rising generation to understand the history and principles of the founding of the United States in 1776 and to strive to form a more perfect Union.”

2485:

This is literally the opening paragraph. You want to exclude the actual verbiage, but will allow a bunch of opinions? How is that contributing the legitimacy of this website? It just solidifies the view that this is just a sounding board for one sided viewpoints.

2338:

and replaced with an entirely new web site created by the incoming Biden administration, unrelated to a specific executive order. The new web site did not contain the files of the outgoing administration’s web site. Note how this also occurred during the

2608:

About "professional" In itself, it is a pretty good word. Professional suggests things such as being qualified (however defined) and practicing in a definable area, having expertise based on a deep level of knowledge, and having a commitment to the area of

1511:

Charles R. Kesler also appears to fall into the NY Times' "conservative intellectuals" category, with his academic credentials in government (not history). It appears the NYT filed him as "conservative intellectual" since his expertise is not in American

1668:

The Los Angeles Times has published that "right-wing historians" are among the group. While we can simply quote the New York Times (which might very well have a conflict of interest in this case), I believe the currently revised intro complies with

1503:

Victor Davis Hanson is... interesting. As a "military historian" and "classicist" his academic credentials appear to be limited to... ancient Greece. It appears the NYT filed him as "conservative intellectual" since his expertise is not in American

2432:

truths". The founding of the United States of America, on the principles of individual freedom is the stated reason the commission was formed. The report itself was designed to act as a guide to sitting presidents on the governance of the country.

1019:

The phrase "white supremacy" does not currently appear in this article. It may have already been removed. If there are further changes that you would like to request for this article, please feel free to reopen this request with that information.

2523:

with the intention of cultivating a better education among Americans in the principles and history of our nation and in the hope that a rediscovery of those principles and the forms of constitutional government will lead to a more perfect

2333:

Another inaccuracy reported in this article: The 1776 Report was not taken off the White House web site in response to Biden’s signing of his executive order. In fact, the entire Trump White House web site was copied to

1297:

fact that he is widely published as a professional historian of US history in general only makes this more plainly incorrect. The fact that he is listed by Stanford University as a a classicist does not nullify any of this.

1896: 2322: 1539:

At some point (like, yesterday) our article made the narrower statement that the Commission included no historians of American history. I think it got trimmed down during a general elimination of redundancy. While the

2614:

The practice of history requires professional skills. Historians are trained to research and critically assess evidence and events of the past, taking into account the broader political, economic, social and cultural

2633:

I am inclined to make another edit that clarifies that the critics were simply "US Historians". After all, US Historians, who are actually historians, have sufficient creditability to be critics of bad US history.

164: 2178:

The RS that is being cited maintains an appearance of conflict of interest in this particular case, as the 1776 commission was made, as Forbes and many others have reported, to directly challenge the work of the

1393:

The commission was conceived partly as a response to The New York Times' 1619 Project, which explores American history through an African-American framing but received generally negative reviews from historians.

1354:

As of January 20 2021 noon EST, the 45th administration's whitehouse.gov website content has been deleted. Fortunately there is an Internet Wayback Machine link to the report PDF, so please add it to the page:

1707:

Also, the op-ed calls them historians, not historians of the United States. The current phrasing "which included no professional specialists in United States history" seems to be the most accurate per RS.

2588:

your edit summary said "these words do not mean the same thing". I don't understand what comparison you are making. I am making an effort to clarify because the words I changed did not make good sense.

2221: 1004:

The author of this information as originally submitted is declaring that this executive order is to strengthen White supremacy. This is opinion, not fact, thereby shall be stricken from this article.

2142:) seems to be using editors' own interpretation of (and citation to) a primary source to supersede the description of the reliable secondary sources (speciifcally, the NY Times article, which states 2562: 2352: 1948:

No, but if we're talking about the significance of numbers, someone might want to explain why it's called the 1776 report. My reading is that it's a (rather obscure) reference to the removal of

2925: 1005: 2348: 898: 2910: 2885: 1358: 845: 744: 2915: 2860: 2727:

This post is garbage. You list no historians when there are in fact historians. You then say Historians hate it and quote journalist. This is why Knowledge (XXG) is not reliable.

1985: 761: 1618:

A fairer and more neutral assessment might include a listing of the qualifications of Kesler, Arnn, and Hanson to juxtapose with the NYT report, with accompanying sources. The

2930: 650: 548: 2905: 274: 158: 1141: 1266:

This article states that no "Professional Historians" are on the commission... and lists Victor Davis Hanson ( a professional Historian) as a member of the commission.

840: 816: 797: 683: 679: 2895: 2665:

That works, but it is a bit awkward. Sounds like a bunch of historians who were citizens of the United States. How about "The commission included no US historians."?

2062: 821: 2385: 411: 2920: 2043: 1470:

Charles R. Kesler is a renowned authority on both Cicero and the Federalist Papers and the founding of the United States—and is frequently described as a historian.

1188: 2880: 2865: 787: 864: 751: 687: 2900: 2820: 401: 520: 90: 1172: 631: 2935: 2855: 2140:"The report includes very few citations, does not include footnotes, and does not explicitly identify its main authors among the members of the commission" 2679:

Why not just state who the report did include, i.e. list the authors of the report and their affiliations. Anything else seems selective and misleading.

2144:"While billed by the White House as “definitive,” the report included no scholarly footnotes or citations, nor was it clear who its primary authors were." 756: 2835: 2825: 1359:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210120005210/https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Presidents-Advisory-1776-Commission-Final-Report.pdf

510: 1463:

Larry P. Arnn has written several histories, and is described as a historian. For example, Lewis E. Lehrman describes him as a "Churchill historian" in

377: 2620:

A historian is an expert in history, especially that of a particular period, geographical region, or social phenomenon. Such as a US History historian.

2326: 2890: 2850: 1926:

I don't think there's any reliable source that is linking the two in this particular case (I have looked and cannot find one), so probably not due to

1132: 621: 956:

I just reworked the section regarding the criticism by some historians as well as the response from the NYT. Please put any discussion here, thanks!

2347:

top of the article and hosted within wikipedia.org. For something more historically accurate, link to the PDF in its original context within the

1448:

The NYT is incorrect in stating that the Commission "included no professional historians, as an increasing number of people have been pointing out:

96: 2875: 2840: 1610: 1184: 55: 486: 2119: 2870: 2815: 2757:

I propose the term "1776 Project" which redirects to this article needs a disambiguation page. The "1776 Project" is also used in reference to

1986:

https://web.archive.org/web/20201110212120/https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-birthday-founding-father-caesar-rodney/

1561: 2270:

we also avoid using our own interpretation of primary sources, especially in a way that undercuts or qualifies the secondary source on point.

1930:. If there is a reliable source, it should probably be used with attribution, since claims of a direct and intentional link might bridge into 1290: 1078:

Just to note that the executive order has now issued in this so it will inevitably continue to receive coverage (not least if Biden repeals).

727: 674: 597: 1453: 2653:

My preferred way of wording this has always been "The commission included no historians of the United States." 00:26, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

368: 329: 897:

procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been

41: 1654:

here - there was literally nothing "diverse" about the commission's ideological composition, and there were no Americanists on the panel.

1223: 2830: 1912: 1370: 1335: 1111: 2566: 1815: 2845: 2356: 1949: 1267: 739: 473: 434: 110: 1009: 961: 588: 543: 115: 31: 1413: 735:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

2321:

One inaccuracy: 1776 Report was not “withdrawn” (first paragraph of article) or “removed” (last paragraph of this article) by

85: 2694: 2253:

claim otherwise.) The journalist who wrote the article on the 1776 Report is totally separate from the 1619 Project developers.

1741: 1550:

the commission, while stocked with conservative educators, did not include a single professional historian of the United States

1200: 917: 894: 304: 179: 1107: 250: 201: 2192:

posting it on Knowledge (XXG)? I realize that I may be a little overeager on this, so any friendly advice would be helpful.

1909: 1903: 236: 146: 76: 1145: 2539: 1659: 1318: 2134:

for two reasons. First, I don't understand the ref changes being made. Second, the change to the last sentence (changing

913: 2742: 2577:

Who were those people? "Professional Historians"? "US Historians"? "professional specialists"? "Scholars of US History?"

2060:

A statement released on the 1776 Report by the American Historical Association and cosigned by 33 history organizations.

957: 942: 2106:

In addition to GA status (which I think this article is a good candidate for), I would also consider nominating it for

1552:. Going with the more specific phrasing may forestall pointless disputes while leaving the essential point unaffected. 1328:

For what reason it is necessary to emphasize that there are no historians with works on US history in the commission?

270: 2184: 1061: 1033: 2085:

Or, care to share thoughts on what improvements must be made before doing so? Any thoughts/feedback welcome here. ---

1867: 2093: 1841: 1789: 1698: 1577: 1475:

been criticism of the Commission's composition, and if more granularity is indicated, include specific objections.

196: 2407: 2300: 1931: 1765: 1245: 983: 806: 120: 140: 2107: 1678: 1651: 905: 830: 210: 2535: 2165: 1655: 1314: 485:

topics on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

310: 1916: 1374: 1339: 1530: 1433: 1271: 1115: 938: 136: 2730: 2682: 2558: 1401: 1366: 1331: 1456:

as "one of America’s best known and most prolific historians." It's worth noting that his Knowledge (XXG)

1302: 1126: 1056: 2690: 1281:

He's a classicist, not a historian of the United States, which is what the article explicitly refers to.

916:

may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the

909: 66: 2660: 2583: 2161: 2086: 1694: 1606: 1573: 1557: 1286: 1168: 596:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

376:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

186: 81: 2738: 2381: 2115: 2022: 1219: 1196: 2770: 2766: 2494: 2437: 2433: 2222:"Trump's 1776 Commission—Created To Challenge Controversial 1619 Project— Releases Report On MLK Day" 2197: 1972: 1939: 1640: 1409: 1298: 719: 2793: 2686: 2458: 2340: 1183:

Is the 1776 Commission officially a presidential commission? If so, we should add it to the article

292: 263: 2797: 2718: 2474: 1993: 1957: 1712: 1493: 1457: 854: 360: 172: 1476: 2734: 1906: 1526: 1429: 1127:

Trump’s ‘1776 report’ defends America’s founding on the basis of slavery and blasts progressivism

482: 244: 215: 2153: 703: 668: 229: 2266:

Yes, OR means that we cannot conduct novel background research and post it on Knowledge (XXG),

1156: 2671: 2645: 2506: 2037: 1871: 1674: 1480: 62: 2136:"The report does not include citations or footnotes, and does not identify its main authors." 1670: 1632: 152: 2070: 1619: 1602: 1553: 1282: 1164: 465: 212: 2188: 2156:. We have to follow the sourcing, not our own interpretation or spin ("explicitly") of it. 1927: 1900: 1628: 1160: 640: 2377: 2271: 2193: 2169: 2157: 2111: 2018: 1981: 1968: 1935: 1636: 1405: 1215: 1192: 1083: 1022: 580: 35: 2149: 1522: 1518: 1497: 1425: 2629:

is a person who studies and writes about the past and is regarded as an authority on it.

2762: 2714: 2462: 1989: 1953: 1708: 1868:"Column: On his way out the door, Trump takes aim again at 'radical' American history" 1452:

Victor Davis Hanson is a professor of classics and military history, described by the

1133:

On MLK Day, Biden volunteers, Trump issues divisive report on slavery and civil rights

574: 564: 537: 2809: 732: 240: 886: 2666: 2640: 2501: 2180: 933: 373: 2249:

is a reliable source here, and they do not have a conflict of interest. (Nor does

932:

I was mainly trying to be concise and summarize without having to repeat the main

17: 2758: 2066: 449: 428: 1101: 1079: 709: 570: 455: 350: 344: 323: 2626: 478: 2789:

that characterized criticism was "overwhelming". My edit was not improper.

2710: 1988:, but as far as I can tell, no reliable sources have made that connection. 1601:

in the next, and during a general cleanup the narrower phrase got removed.

731:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the 214: 459: 2531: 593: 2801: 2774: 2746: 2722: 2698: 2673: 2647: 2570: 2555:

is already being taught, or is it trying to alter history in some way?

2543: 2508: 2479: 2441: 2360: 2274: 2201: 2172: 2100: 2074: 1997: 1976: 1961: 1943: 1920: 1716: 1702: 1663: 1644: 1581: 1534: 1484: 1437: 1417: 1378: 1343: 1322: 1306: 1275: 1149: 1119: 1102:

White House Releases ‘1776 Report’ That Tries To Erase Legacy Of Slavery

1087: 1067: 1040: 1013: 946: 2335: 1350:

Whitehouse.gov link dead, please add Wayback Machine link to report PDF

1108:

Trump administration issues racist school curriculum report on MLK day

1521:

disagreement with the NYT's analysis does not change their status as

1650:

Hahahaha, the Washington Times? Are you serious? No, let's not give

2530:

intention, it probably shouldn't have read like the right-wing

1572:

It should be no "professional historian of the United States".

2395: 2288: 2063:

AHA Condemns Report of Advisory 1776 Commission (January 2021)

1816:"1776 Commission's report offers unifying message for America" 1233: 971: 881: 286: 258: 224: 216: 26: 2457:. I don't see a good reason why we should add this. Also see 1508:

intellectual" since his expertise is not in American History.

1952:

and his ride to attend the vote for independence on July 2.

853: 829: 805: 639: 1635:, it may be wise to include one of these with attribution. 1163:, I suppose, but maybe it'll get mentioned somewhere else. 937:

scholars from Princeton University" is omission and NPOV.

2500:

president, that person is not qualified to be president.

904:

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the

2056:

American Historical Association statement (and 33 others)

1681:. Right-wing historians, after all, are still historians. 1595:

not a single professional historian of the United States

2594:"mainstream US historians" to "professional specialists" 2593: 2131: 1591: 1587: 1211: 1207: 171: 1677:, this also complies with the guidelines laid out in 2713:

is a new source that seems relevant to the article.

592:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 477:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 372:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 1548:near the top, further down they get more specific: 185: 2926:Unknown-importance United States History articles 1790:"53 Historians Weigh In on Barack Obama's Legacy" 1363:I would do it myself if the page wasn't locked. 2911:Low-importance United States Government articles 2886:B-Class United States articles of Low-importance 2285:Request to correct inaccuracies, 23 January 2021 44:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1189:Category:United States Presidential Commissions 2765:created in 2020. Any objections? Any support? 2392:Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2021 2080:Anyone want to tackle Good article nomination? 1895:Should be mentioned that "18" is a widespread 1230:Semi-protected edit request on 19 January 2021 968:Semi-protected edit request on 3 November 2020 2916:WikiProject United States Government articles 2861:Unknown-importance American politics articles 8: 2168:since they have expressed interest in this. 2042:: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list ( 1842:"The Ridiculous Attacks on the 1776 Report" 1742:"The media are lying about the 1776 Report" 2931:WikiProject United States History articles 2556: 2110:(possibly after GA status is achieved). -- 2017: 1673:and, in line with the sources provided by 1364: 1329: 663: 532: 423: 318: 2906:B-Class United States Government articles 1770:The National Endowment for the Humanities 1465:Lincoln & Churchill: Statesmen at War 772:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject United States 2780:"overwhelmingly" vs "largely" criticized 2376:Thanks for pointing out these issues. -- 2019:The President's Advisory 1776 Commission 1496:opinion column, which is definitely not 386:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Conservatism 2896:Low-importance U.S. Presidents articles 2563:2604:2D80:5580:8500:A493:432A:C2D4:A4B8 2212: 2010: 1733: 1185:Presidential Commission (United States) 1097:The report is ridiculed by historians: 665: 534: 425: 320: 290: 2921:B-Class United States History articles 2522: 2353:2600:1004:B12F:A8AD:9088:D17E:1EBC:E47 2035: 1627:reliable as of the current listing on 1598: 1594: 1590:now. I think what happened is that it 1549: 1545: 1444:"no professional historians" incorrect 1155:There's a follow up to that last item 2881:Low-importance United States articles 2866:American politics task force articles 2325:. The new executive order revokes 1389:Under the "History" section, it says 495:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Education 7: 2901:WikiProject U.S. Presidents articles 2821:Low-importance Conservatism articles 2516:That's what it's stated purpose is. 1840:Harsayani, David (19 January 2021). 1492:Your first "source" is a syndicated 1006:2601:408:503:420:A06E:6903:8B43:EDC0 817:WikiProject United States Presidents 725:This article is within the scope of 606:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Politics 586:This article is within the scope of 471:This article is within the scope of 366:This article is within the scope of 273:on 24 September 2020. The result of 1891:18 members, December 18, January 18 1424:The Federalist is definitely not a 309:It is of interest to the following 34:for discussing improvements to the 2936:WikiProject United States articles 2856:B-Class American politics articles 2341:transition between Obama and Trump 2220:Brewster, Jack (18 January 2021). 1814:Hanson, Victor (20 January 2021). 952:Update on 10/12 regarding Critisim 775:Template:WikiProject United States 25: 2836:Low-importance education articles 2826:WikiProject Conservatism articles 2323:President Biden’s executive order 964:) 22:42., 12 October 2020 (UTC). 389:Template:WikiProject Conservatism 61:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome! 2891:B-Class U.S. Presidents articles 2851:Low-importance politics articles 2785:use the phrase "overwhelming". 2448: 2399: 2367: 2292: 1237: 1045: 975: 885: 712: 702: 667: 573: 563: 536: 458: 448: 427: 353: 343: 322: 291: 262: 228: 56:Click here to start a new topic. 2126:Recent edit - OR/SYNTH concerns 792:This article has been rated as 626:This article has been rated as 515:This article has been rated as 406:This article has been rated as 269:This article was nominated for 2876:B-Class United States articles 2841:WikiProject Education articles 947:19:48, 22 September 2020 (UTC) 498:Template:WikiProject Education 1: 2871:WikiProject Politics articles 2816:B-Class Conservatism articles 2699:18:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC) 2674:01:00, 25 February 2021 (UTC) 2648:00:16, 25 February 2021 (UTC) 2544:01:32, 25 February 2021 (UTC) 2526:. Of course, if that was its 2509:00:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC) 2349:archived White House web site 1460:describes him as a historian. 1206:It appears this is resolved: 1159:. Not really usable here per 1088:10:16, 11 November 2020 (UTC) 918:contentious topics procedures 862:This article is supported by 838:This article is supported by 814:This article is supported by 648:This article is supported by 609:Template:WikiProject Politics 600:and see a list of open tasks. 489:and see a list of open tasks. 380:and see a list of open tasks. 53:Put new text under old text. 2775:00:47, 19 January 2022 (UTC) 2571:20:40, 31 January 2021 (UTC) 2480:01:19, 27 January 2021 (UTC) 2442:00:10, 27 January 2021 (UTC) 2386:04:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC) 2361:03:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC) 2275:01:22, 22 January 2021 (UTC) 2202:00:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC) 2173:23:10, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 2120:01:25, 22 January 2021 (UTC) 2108:Knowledge (XXG):Did you know 2101:22:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 2075:20:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1998:21:18, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1977:20:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1962:19:45, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1944:19:19, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1921:12:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1897:nazi code for "Adolf Hitler" 1717:04:02, 22 January 2021 (UTC) 1703:22:04, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1664:21:04, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1645:20:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1611:20:33, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1582:20:28, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1562:20:22, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1535:20:06, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1485:19:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1438:19:06, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1418:19:01, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1379:17:53, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1344:07:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC) 1323:22:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC) 1307:21:23, 26 January 2021 (UTC) 1291:00:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC) 1276:23:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC) 1224:02:37, 21 January 2021 (UTC) 1201:14:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC) 1173:06:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC) 1150:05:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC) 1120:04:59, 19 January 2021 (UTC) 1068:06:33, 19 January 2021 (UTC) 1041:16:29, 3 November 2020 (UTC) 1014:16:21, 3 November 2020 (UTC) 651:American politics task force 2422:to reactivate your request. 2410:has been answered. Set the 2315:to reactivate your request. 2303:has been answered. Set the 2185:The New York Times Magazine 1428:in any way, shape or form. 1260:to reactivate your request. 1248:has been answered. Set the 1142:2601:1C0:CE00:496:0:0:0:8EF 998:to reactivate your request. 986:has been answered. Set the 841:WikiProject U.S. Government 2952: 2831:B-Class education articles 2747:22:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC) 1599:no professional historians 1546:no professional historians 906:purpose of Knowledge (XXG) 798:project's importance scale 632:project's importance scale 521:project's importance scale 412:project's importance scale 2846:B-Class politics articles 2723:14:08, 4 March 2021 (UTC) 2183:, which was published in 920:before editing this page. 861: 837: 813: 791: 728:WikiProject United States 697: 647: 625: 558: 514: 443: 405: 338: 317: 91:Be welcoming to newcomers 2802:04:30, 5 July 2023 (UTC) 2604:based upon these ideas: 2132:challenged a recent edit 1179:Presidential commission? 914:normal editorial process 865:WikiProject U.S. history 733:United States of America 369:WikiProject Conservatism 2592:You changed my edit of 1631:. To keep in line with 958:JerseyThroughandThrough 901:as a contentious topic. 253:) on 22 September 2020. 2534:which it actually is. 2148:That is impermissible 1950:Caesar Rodney's statue 1398:could go either way. 1395: 1135:, NBC News, 18.01.2021 1129:, NY times, 19.01.2021 910:standards of behaviour 858: 834: 810: 778:United States articles 644: 299:This article is rated 86:avoid personal attacks 2753:Disambiguation needed 2336:the national archives 2327:executive order 13958 1984:, I was referring to 1766:"Victor Davis Hanson" 1597:in one paragraph and 1391: 1187:and add the category 857: 833: 809: 643: 474:WikiProject Education 392:Conservatism articles 303:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 237:proposed for deletion 111:Neutral point of view 2759:1776 Unites campaign 1866:Goldberg, Nicholas. 1820:The Washington Times 1588:changed the phrasing 928:Historians criticism 720:United States portal 589:WikiProject Politics 116:No original research 2761:, a project of the 2536:NorthBySouthBaranof 2428:Add the following: 2166:NorthBySouthBaranof 1656:NorthBySouthBaranof 1494:Washington Examiner 1315:NorthBySouthBaranof 1110:, CNN, 19.01.2021-- 1104:, MSNBC, 19.01.2021 746:Articles Requested! 361:Conservatism portal 2550:Clean up Contents: 939:Progressingamerica 895:contentious topics 859: 835: 811: 645: 501:education articles 305:content assessment 97:dispute resolution 58: 2733:comment added by 2685:comment added by 2573: 2561:comment added by 2478: 2426: 2425: 2319: 2318: 2023:"The 1776 Report" 1872:Los Angeles Times 1517:Regardless, your 1404:comment added by 1381: 1369:comment added by 1346: 1334:comment added by 1264: 1263: 1074:The EO has issued 1039: 1002: 1001: 925: 924: 880: 879: 876: 875: 872: 871: 662: 661: 658: 657: 612:politics articles 531: 530: 527: 526: 483:education-related 422: 421: 418: 417: 285: 284: 257: 256: 223: 222: 77:Assume good faith 54: 18:Talk:1776 Project 16:(Redirected from 2943: 2749: 2701: 2669: 2664: 2661:Snooganssnoogans 2643: 2587: 2584:Snooganssnoogans 2504: 2498: 2472: 2465: 2456: 2452: 2451: 2417: 2413: 2403: 2402: 2396: 2375: 2371: 2370: 2310: 2306: 2296: 2295: 2289: 2233: 2232: 2230: 2228: 2217: 2162:Snooganssnoogans 2145: 2141: 2137: 2096: 2089: 2088:Another Believer 2048: 2047: 2041: 2033: 2031: 2029: 2015: 1932:WP:EXTRAORDINARY 1883: 1882: 1880: 1878: 1863: 1857: 1856: 1854: 1852: 1837: 1831: 1830: 1828: 1826: 1811: 1805: 1804: 1802: 1801: 1786: 1780: 1779: 1777: 1776: 1762: 1756: 1755: 1753: 1752: 1738: 1695:Snooganssnoogans 1620:Washington Times 1574:Snooganssnoogans 1420: 1255: 1251: 1241: 1240: 1234: 1064: 1059: 1049: 1048: 1036: 1031: 1028: 1025: 993: 989: 979: 978: 972: 889: 882: 780: 779: 776: 773: 770: 722: 717: 716: 715: 706: 699: 698: 693: 690: 671: 664: 614: 613: 610: 607: 604: 583: 578: 577: 567: 560: 559: 554: 551: 540: 533: 503: 502: 499: 496: 493: 468: 466:Education portal 463: 462: 452: 445: 444: 439: 431: 424: 394: 393: 390: 387: 384: 363: 358: 357: 356: 347: 340: 339: 334: 326: 319: 302: 296: 295: 287: 266: 259: 232: 225: 217: 190: 189: 175: 106:Article policies 27: 21: 2951: 2950: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2942: 2941: 2940: 2806: 2805: 2782: 2755: 2728: 2707: 2680: 2667: 2658: 2641: 2637:Your thoughts? 2600:not very good. 2581: 2579: 2552: 2502: 2492: 2463: 2449: 2447: 2415: 2411: 2400: 2394: 2368: 2366: 2330:public domain 2308: 2304: 2293: 2287: 2238: 2237: 2236: 2226: 2224: 2219: 2218: 2214: 2143: 2139: 2135: 2128: 2099: 2094: 2087: 2082: 2058: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2034: 2027: 2025: 2016: 2012: 1893: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1876: 1874: 1865: 1864: 1860: 1850: 1848: 1846:National Review 1839: 1838: 1834: 1824: 1822: 1813: 1812: 1808: 1799: 1797: 1788: 1787: 1783: 1774: 1772: 1764: 1763: 1759: 1750: 1748: 1740: 1739: 1735: 1679:WP:FALSEBALANCE 1652:WP:FALSEBALANCE 1446: 1399: 1387: 1385:Unclear Wording 1352: 1253: 1249: 1238: 1232: 1181: 1095: 1076: 1062: 1057: 1046: 1034: 1026: 1023: 991: 987: 976: 970: 954: 930: 908:, any expected 777: 774: 771: 768: 767: 766: 752:Become a Member 718: 713: 711: 691: 677: 611: 608: 605: 602: 601: 581:Politics portal 579: 572: 552: 546: 500: 497: 494: 491: 490: 464: 457: 437: 391: 388: 385: 382: 381: 359: 354: 352: 332: 300: 219: 218: 213: 132: 127: 126: 125: 102: 72: 36:1776 Commission 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 2949: 2947: 2939: 2938: 2933: 2928: 2923: 2918: 2913: 2908: 2903: 2898: 2893: 2888: 2883: 2878: 2873: 2868: 2863: 2858: 2853: 2848: 2843: 2838: 2833: 2828: 2823: 2818: 2808: 2807: 2781: 2778: 2763:Woodson Center 2754: 2751: 2706: 2703: 2677: 2676: 2655: 2654: 2631: 2630: 2622: 2621: 2617: 2616: 2611: 2610: 2578: 2575: 2551: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2514: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2483: 2482: 2424: 2423: 2404: 2393: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2317: 2316: 2297: 2286: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2247:New York Times 2235: 2234: 2211: 2210: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2127: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2091: 2081: 2078: 2065: 2061: 2057: 2054: 2050: 2049: 2009: 2008: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1964: 1946: 1892: 1889: 1885: 1884: 1858: 1832: 1806: 1781: 1757: 1732: 1731: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1613: 1569: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1564: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1472: 1471: 1468: 1461: 1445: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1386: 1383: 1351: 1348: 1326: 1325: 1294: 1293: 1262: 1261: 1242: 1231: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1180: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1139: 1138: 1136: 1130: 1123: 1122: 1105: 1094: 1091: 1075: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1043: 1000: 999: 980: 969: 966: 953: 950: 929: 926: 923: 922: 890: 878: 877: 874: 873: 870: 869: 860: 850: 849: 846:Low-importance 836: 826: 825: 822:Low-importance 812: 802: 801: 794:Low-importance 790: 784: 783: 781: 765: 764: 759: 754: 749: 742: 740:Template Usage 736: 724: 723: 707: 695: 694: 692:Low‑importance 672: 660: 659: 656: 655: 646: 636: 635: 628:Low-importance 624: 618: 617: 615: 598:the discussion 585: 584: 568: 556: 555: 553:Low‑importance 541: 529: 528: 525: 524: 517:Low-importance 513: 507: 506: 504: 487:the discussion 470: 469: 453: 441: 440: 438:Low‑importance 432: 420: 419: 416: 415: 408:Low-importance 404: 398: 397: 395: 378:the discussion 365: 364: 348: 336: 335: 333:Low‑importance 327: 315: 314: 308: 297: 283: 282: 275:the discussion 267: 255: 254: 235:This page was 233: 221: 220: 211: 209: 208: 205: 204: 192: 191: 129: 128: 124: 123: 118: 113: 104: 103: 101: 100: 93: 88: 79: 73: 71: 70: 59: 50: 49: 46: 45: 39: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2948: 2937: 2934: 2932: 2929: 2927: 2924: 2922: 2919: 2917: 2914: 2912: 2909: 2907: 2904: 2902: 2899: 2897: 2894: 2892: 2889: 2887: 2884: 2882: 2879: 2877: 2874: 2872: 2869: 2867: 2864: 2862: 2859: 2857: 2854: 2852: 2849: 2847: 2844: 2842: 2839: 2837: 2834: 2832: 2829: 2827: 2824: 2822: 2819: 2817: 2814: 2813: 2811: 2804: 2803: 2799: 2795: 2790: 2786: 2779: 2777: 2776: 2772: 2768: 2764: 2760: 2752: 2750: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2736: 2732: 2725: 2724: 2720: 2716: 2712: 2704: 2702: 2700: 2696: 2692: 2688: 2684: 2675: 2672: 2670: 2662: 2657: 2656: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2646: 2644: 2638: 2635: 2628: 2624: 2623: 2619: 2618: 2613: 2612: 2607: 2606: 2605: 2601: 2597: 2595: 2590: 2585: 2576: 2574: 2572: 2568: 2564: 2560: 2549: 2545: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2519: 2518: 2517: 2510: 2507: 2505: 2496: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2481: 2476: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2460: 2455: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2439: 2435: 2429: 2421: 2418:parameter to 2409: 2405: 2398: 2397: 2391: 2387: 2383: 2379: 2374: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2362: 2358: 2354: 2350: 2344: 2342: 2337: 2331: 2328: 2324: 2314: 2311:parameter to 2302: 2298: 2291: 2290: 2284: 2276: 2273: 2269: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2223: 2216: 2213: 2209: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2190: 2186: 2182: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2171: 2167: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2151: 2146: 2133: 2125: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2109: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2097: 2090: 2079: 2077: 2076: 2072: 2068: 2064: 2055: 2045: 2039: 2024: 2020: 2014: 2011: 2007: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1980: 1979: 1978: 1974: 1970: 1965: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1951: 1947: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1918: 1914: 1913:77.183.42.254 1910: 1907: 1904: 1901: 1898: 1890: 1873: 1869: 1862: 1859: 1847: 1843: 1836: 1833: 1821: 1817: 1810: 1807: 1795: 1794:Intelligencer 1791: 1785: 1782: 1771: 1767: 1761: 1758: 1747: 1743: 1737: 1734: 1730: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1649: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1621: 1612: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1596: 1593: 1589: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1579: 1575: 1571: 1570: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1547: 1543: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1527:IHateAccounts 1524: 1520: 1516: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1501: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1486: 1482: 1478: 1469: 1466: 1462: 1459: 1455: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1443: 1439: 1435: 1431: 1430:IHateAccounts 1427: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1419: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1394: 1390: 1384: 1382: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1371:24.35.123.137 1368: 1361: 1360: 1356: 1349: 1347: 1345: 1341: 1337: 1336:37.215.58.125 1333: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1277: 1273: 1269: 1259: 1256:parameter to 1247: 1243: 1236: 1235: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1205: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1198: 1194: 1190: 1186: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1137: 1134: 1131: 1128: 1125: 1124: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1112:93.211.218.85 1109: 1106: 1103: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1092: 1090: 1089: 1085: 1081: 1073: 1069: 1066: 1065: 1060: 1052: 1044: 1042: 1037: 1030: 1029: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1011: 1007: 997: 994:parameter to 985: 981: 974: 973: 967: 965: 963: 959: 951: 949: 948: 944: 940: 935: 927: 921: 919: 915: 911: 907: 902: 900: 896: 891: 888: 884: 883: 867: 866: 856: 852: 851: 847: 844:(assessed as 843: 842: 832: 828: 827: 823: 820:(assessed as 819: 818: 808: 804: 803: 799: 795: 789: 786: 785: 782: 769:United States 763: 760: 758: 755: 753: 750: 748: 747: 743: 741: 738: 737: 734: 730: 729: 721: 710: 708: 705: 701: 700: 696: 689: 685: 681: 676: 675:United States 673: 670: 666: 653: 652: 642: 638: 637: 633: 629: 623: 620: 619: 616: 599: 595: 591: 590: 582: 576: 571: 569: 566: 562: 561: 557: 550: 545: 542: 539: 535: 522: 518: 512: 509: 508: 505: 488: 484: 480: 476: 475: 467: 461: 456: 454: 451: 447: 446: 442: 436: 433: 430: 426: 413: 409: 403: 400: 399: 396: 379: 375: 371: 370: 362: 351: 349: 346: 342: 341: 337: 331: 328: 325: 321: 316: 312: 306: 298: 294: 289: 288: 280: 276: 272: 268: 265: 261: 260: 252: 249: 246: 242: 238: 234: 231: 227: 226: 207: 206: 203: 200: 198: 194: 193: 188: 184: 181: 178: 174: 170: 166: 163: 160: 157: 154: 151: 148: 145: 142: 138: 135: 134:Find sources: 131: 130: 122: 121:Verifiability 119: 117: 114: 112: 109: 108: 107: 98: 94: 92: 89: 87: 83: 80: 78: 75: 74: 68: 64: 63:Learn to edit 60: 57: 52: 51: 48: 47: 43: 37: 33: 29: 28: 19: 2791: 2787: 2783: 2756: 2729:— Preceding 2726: 2708: 2681:— Preceding 2678: 2639: 2636: 2632: 2602: 2598: 2591: 2580: 2557:— Preceding 2553: 2527: 2515: 2484: 2467: 2466: 2453: 2430: 2427: 2419: 2408:edit request 2372: 2345: 2332: 2320: 2312: 2301:edit request 2267: 2250: 2246: 2225:. Retrieved 2215: 2207: 2181:1619 Project 2147: 2129: 2083: 2059: 2026:. Retrieved 2013: 2005: 1894: 1875:. Retrieved 1861: 1849:. Retrieved 1845: 1835: 1823:. Retrieved 1819: 1809: 1798:. Retrieved 1796:. 2015-01-12 1793: 1784: 1773:. Retrieved 1769: 1760: 1749:. Retrieved 1745: 1736: 1728: 1624: 1617: 1541: 1473: 1464: 1447: 1400:— Preceding 1396: 1392: 1388: 1365:— Preceding 1362: 1357: 1353: 1330:— Preceding 1327: 1295: 1268:73.19.59.112 1265: 1257: 1246:edit request 1182: 1140: 1096: 1077: 1055: 1050: 1021: 1003: 995: 984:edit request 955: 934:1619 Project 931: 903: 892: 863: 839: 815: 793: 757:Project Talk 745: 726: 649: 627: 587: 516: 472: 407: 383:Conservatism 374:conservatism 367: 330:Conservatism 311:WikiProjects 279:no consensus 278: 247: 195: 182: 176: 168: 161: 155: 149: 143: 133: 105: 30:This is the 2468:Ganbaruby! 1934:territory. 1746:www.msn.com 1477:Elle Kpyros 1093:1776 Report 159:free images 42:not a forum 2810:Categories 2792:Thoughts? 2767:Cfwschmidt 2709:Hi folks, 2705:New source 2495:Baddbowman 2459:WP:PRIMARY 2434:Baddbowman 2412:|answered= 2305:|answered= 2272:Neutrality 2227:22 January 2208:References 2194:Mikehawk10 2170:Neutrality 2158:Mikehawk10 2028:21 January 2006:References 1982:Mikehawk10 1969:Mikehawk10 1936:Mikehawk10 1851:21 January 1825:21 January 1800:2021-01-20 1775:2021-01-20 1751:2021-01-20 1729:References 1637:Mikehawk10 1603:XOR'easter 1554:XOR'easter 1406:Tr3ndyBEAR 1299:Lymanwight 1283:XOR'easter 1250:|answered= 1165:XOR'easter 988:|answered= 899:designated 684:Government 680:Presidents 2794:Pinkslimo 2715:MonsieurD 2687:Truthdeck 2627:historian 2609:practice. 2378:1990'sguy 2112:1990'sguy 1990:Vexations 1954:Vexations 1877:3 January 1709:Eccekevin 1216:1990'sguy 1193:1990'sguy 1051:Not done: 912:, or any 492:Education 479:education 435:Education 99:if needed 82:Be polite 32:talk page 2743:contribs 2731:unsigned 2695:contribs 2683:unsigned 2615:context. 2559:unsigned 2532:agitprop 2454:Not done 2154:WP:SYNTH 2038:cite web 1512:History. 1504:History. 1414:contribs 1402:unsigned 1367:unsigned 1332:unsigned 603:Politics 594:politics 549:American 544:Politics 271:deletion 251:contribs 241:Bishonen 197:Archives 67:get help 40:This is 38:article. 2668:Osomite 2642:Osomite 2503:Osomite 2475:Say hi! 1671:WP:NPOV 1633:WP:NPOV 1586:I have 1458:article 796:on the 688:History 630:on the 519:on the 410:on the 301:B-class 165:WP refs 153:scholar 2735:Ing311 2251:Forbes 2189:WP:NOR 2067:Myotus 1928:WP:NOR 1629:WP:RSP 1161:WP:SPS 1058:Gerald 762:Alerts 307:scale. 137:Google 2524:Union 2416:|ans= 2406:This 2309:|ans= 2299:This 2150:WP:OR 2130:I've 1544:says 1523:WP:RS 1519:WP:OR 1498:WP:RS 1426:WP:RS 1254:|ans= 1244:This 1080:FOARP 1035:Meep? 992:|ans= 982:This 180:JSTOR 141:books 95:Seek 2798:talk 2771:talk 2739:talk 2719:talk 2711:here 2691:talk 2567:talk 2540:talk 2528:true 2438:talk 2382:talk 2373:Done 2357:talk 2245:The 2229:2021 2198:talk 2164:and 2116:talk 2095:Talk 2071:talk 2044:link 2030:2021 1994:talk 1973:talk 1958:talk 1940:talk 1917:talk 1879:2021 1853:2021 1827:2021 1713:talk 1699:talk 1675:talk 1660:talk 1641:talk 1607:talk 1592:said 1578:talk 1558:talk 1531:talk 1481:talk 1434:talk 1410:talk 1375:talk 1340:talk 1319:talk 1303:talk 1287:talk 1272:talk 1220:talk 1197:talk 1191:. -- 1169:talk 1157:here 1146:talk 1116:talk 1084:talk 1010:talk 962:talk 943:talk 893:The 481:and 277:was 245:talk 173:FENS 147:news 84:and 2414:or 2343:. 2307:or 2268:and 2138:to 1542:NYT 1454:NEH 1252:or 1027:Hef 990:or 788:Low 622:Low 511:Low 402:Low 239:by 187:TWL 2812:: 2800:) 2773:) 2745:) 2741:• 2721:) 2697:) 2693:• 2625:A 2569:) 2542:) 2461:. 2440:) 2420:no 2384:) 2359:) 2351:. 2313:no 2200:) 2118:) 2073:) 2040:}} 2036:{{ 2021:. 1996:) 1975:) 1960:) 1942:) 1919:) 1911:-- 1908:, 1905:, 1902:, 1899:. 1870:. 1844:. 1818:. 1792:. 1768:. 1744:. 1715:) 1701:) 1662:) 1643:) 1625:is 1609:) 1580:) 1560:) 1533:) 1525:. 1500:. 1483:) 1436:) 1416:) 1412:• 1377:) 1342:) 1321:) 1305:) 1289:) 1274:) 1258:no 1222:) 1214:-- 1199:) 1171:) 1148:) 1118:) 1086:) 1063:WL 1024:El 1020:‑‑ 1012:) 996:no 945:) 848:). 824:). 686:/ 682:/ 678:: 547:: 167:) 65:; 2796:( 2769:( 2737:( 2717:( 2689:( 2663:: 2659:@ 2586:: 2582:@ 2565:( 2538:( 2497:: 2493:@ 2477:) 2473:( 2464:◢ 2436:( 2380:( 2355:( 2231:. 2196:( 2152:/ 2114:( 2098:) 2092:( 2069:( 2046:) 2032:. 1992:( 1971:( 1956:( 1938:( 1915:( 1881:. 1855:. 1829:. 1803:. 1778:. 1754:. 1711:( 1697:( 1658:( 1639:( 1605:( 1576:( 1556:( 1529:( 1479:( 1467:. 1432:( 1408:( 1373:( 1338:( 1317:( 1301:( 1285:( 1270:( 1218:( 1212:2 1210:, 1208:1 1195:( 1167:( 1144:( 1114:( 1082:( 1038:) 1032:( 1008:( 960:( 941:( 868:. 800:. 654:. 634:. 523:. 414:. 313:: 281:. 248:· 243:( 202:1 199:: 183:· 177:· 169:· 162:· 156:· 150:· 144:· 139:( 69:. 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index