Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Conservatism/Archive 5

5902:: This is a good example of what is wrong with WP "neutrality". The KKK has always had a history deeply entrenched with Democrats. The KKK was created to terrorize Republicans who supported ending slavery, and right up to the 1960's, Democratic Congress member and long-time KKK leader Robert Byrd was tolerated by the modern democratic party. Even with this solid, non-refutable historical evidence, The WP liberal gatekeepers want to throw that history away because a liberal professor named "Brian Farmer" out of a small texas college wrote a book of revisionist history. Five minutes Googling professor Brian Farmer reveals clearly that he is an uber-left liberal, with a definite personal agenda. Why does his book trump solid history of the KKK, enough to peg the KKK as a "right wing" organization in the USA political model, when the Republican Party in the USA was the target of the KKK from its onset? I shudder when I think of the schoolkids learning their "history" from WP. Unbelievable. -- 1773:"...all political organizations and movements that refer to themselves ..." That's going to be a major change to the scope, and require considerable effort to determine. For one thing, many movements do not have leaders with authority to speak for everyone. For another, the project currently covers more than just organizations and movements: it also includes individuals, publications, and concepts. In addition, this scope would exclude religious topics. While I agree with that change, I had thought the consensus was to include them. Finally and most importantly, limiting the scope to only movements and organizations which are self-described as conservative means that no reliable sources for independent views of whether they are conservative would be used. Taken together, only a fraction of the current articles would qualify under this scope. I think that may be a good thing, as I've previously asserted that the vague scope could encompass tens of thousands of articles. 348:"Fifty years of practice have also proved that in upholding and perfecting the people's congress system, the most fundamental thing is to maintain an organic unity of upholding Party leadership, ensuring the people being masters and administering the country according to law. . . . The building up of ruling capability is a fundamental construction of our Party after it holds power. An important aspect of raising the Party's leading level and ruling ability is to adhere to the basic strategy of running the state according to law, regard administration as a basic method for the Party to run the state and exercise administration, persist in carrying out activities within the scope of the Constitution and laws, act strictly according to law, and be good at using state power to handle state affairs. . . . The NPC has traversed a 50-year glorious course. A continual perfection of the people's congress system will surely usher in a bright future . . ." 4956:@Klein: the problem with redefining the scope is the proponents of this initiative. Will Beback is not a member and has no standing in a scope discussion and he encouraged TFD to join not to improve articles but to argue about the scope. He's on record stating that the project is too big. Besides being 1 of only 2 members voting to delete WPConservatism, TFD favors a scope which would only cover American articles--thus shrinking the project by half. Binksternet nominated the project for deletion--enough said. They respectively want to inhibit growth, reduce the project to a shell, and delete the project entirely. It could be argued that their positions and actions have not been in the best interest of this group. These are the editors who obsessively propose redefining the scope on a regular basis, and to adopt any of their proposals would be to our detriment.– 250:"We have maintained free entry to national museums and galleries to protect access to our great heritage . . . We will cut red tape to encourage the performance of more live music . . . We will work towards an ambitious global climate deal that will limit emissions and explore the creation of new international sources of funding for the purpose of climate change adaptation and mitigation. . . We have established a Commission to investigate the creation of a UK Bill of Rights that protects and extends British liberties, that incorporates and builds on all our obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, and ensures that these rights continue to be enshrined in British law . . . We will use our relationships with other countries to push for unequivocal support for gay rights and for UK civil partnerships to be recognised internationally" 2792:

is inclusive, but also concise. Myself, I would support doing something like this in theory, but I just don't see it happening. A compromise should therefore be made, which I think is the modified version above. I would add in something similar to the phrase "incontestably described as or commonly held to be conservative by academia i.e. verifiable third party sources" and "in the context of the nation in which they are based". In other words, whilst American democrats are considered conservative by European standards, they are not in their own context, hence they shouldn't be included. That should sort it out a bit.

4211:"knee-jerk". It's a colloquial synonym for "automatic" (i.e. predictable). It may be mistaken in this context, (I happen to think it probably is) but I do not see it is as derogatory, or as legitimizing the removal of the IP's post. Censorship of harmless and sincerely-held views is not conducive to a collegial editing environment. I note that several posts to these pages, including from The Founder, have appeared to be accusatory, belittling and dismissive (and therefore arguably derogatory), yet those comments have not been removed. 398:

prevailing comments of some members to "like it or leave it" (and other "theres the door!" type comments) have no place in the open marketplace of ideas that WP creates. As conservatives it has been been said by some that we intrinsically mistrust the potential for success of things when left on their own and feel the need to manage. But the arena where this project exists is proof that WE (WikiPedia Editors) don't need to be over-managed, that we can be trusted and should be assummed to be of good faith.

31: 4022:

social democrat, which he probably feels disqualifies him. (He may not want the job anyway.) At any rate, I think we need a moderate as coordinator, someone who is willing to build bridges to all the different factions here. Perhaps we can find another candidate? Incidentally I see the roles of the 'founder' and 'coordinator' as being essentially different. The 'founder' can be a leader, but the 'coordinator' can't. Hope that is clearer. --

3601:"A co-ordinator's voice is often, by virtue of their position, granted considerable weight in internal discussions, enabling co-ordinators to take the lead in drafting project guidelines and visions, and overseeing the implementation of those decisions; however co-ordinators are not arbitrators or 'leaders' of a WikiProject — all such decisions are still made by community consensus." 5282:

clear proposals regarding scope. The question here is why one editor decided that the Klan was outside the scope of this project, despite clear and extensive connections to conservatism. Attacking the integrity and purported goals of other editors is not a good way of addressing simple issues like this. Please do not make further negative remarks about your fellow editors.

5492:"Extremistst" is a vague description, and it's not clear why that would be part of the scope. Are conservatives never extreme? Some folks considered Ronald Reagan an extremist - so there could be a lot of contention over deciding that boundary. Would folks here feel comfortable if Wikiproject Socialism excluded extremist groups on that side, like communist parties? 186: 119: 5371:: you should not question the motives of other editors on article talk pages. I voted to delete the project because "the topic is ambiguous and therefore the scope is unclear". I have actually created several articles in the project and substantially contributed to many more. However, I believe that the scope of the project needs definition. 3654:, but a coordinator could really only be useful for a project with many taskforces, such as WikiProject Films or WikiProject Military History. Seeing as we currently have no taskforces, it is (to me) both unneeded and an overt grab at power. Given Lionelt already does all of this, we have no need to usurp him from the help he gives the project. 5632:." Why isn't that true anymore when it's a group that might make conservatism look bad? This is WP:Conservatism, not WP:People and groups Lionelt and Anupam personally agree with (or rather, People and groups public association with whom doesn't discredit Lionelt and Anupam), which is not an appropriate scope for a Wikiproject. – 3877:'s abrasive and confrontational style make him unfit to be a coordinator. (Likewise it might be better if other controversial members did not put themselves up for this.) We need a level-headed individual who has the necessary motivation and ability to help guide this project back towards normal, consensus-based collaboration. -- 4597:, written by a social sciences professor and published by Cambridge Scholars Press, is a tangential or unreliable source? That book devotes a whole section to the Klan, not just a passing mention. If one source is not sufficient there are more. But however we decide this let's set a standard we can use project-wide. 4393: 5093:

conservative parties. BTW, it's important to remember, when discussing the Klan, that historically there were at least three distinctly different Klans, and in modern times there are numerous Klan groups. The "second" Klan, which reached its peak in the 1920s, was relatively mainstream unlike the modern ones.

4789:

I am not assuming anything. Your statements are clear and unambiguous. Now... You asked me what my basis for opposition was. I responded that the basis was WP:POINT. Then, I asked you, "If the project is too big, as you say, why are you adding articles?" You responded with: "Is there a consensus that

4765: 4623:

The argument that "The KKK has always had a history deeply entrenched with Democrats" is false--the KKK in the 1860s was anti-Republican & the KKK of the 1920s was bipartisan. Byrd became a prominent Democrat long AFTER he renounced the KKK. and note David Duke, Republican candidate for governor

4589:

Please assume good faith. Is there a consensus that this project should stop expanding? There has been considerable discussion about the inclusion of religion, but otherwise I'm not aware of a discussion which has agreed that we should stop adding articles. If you disagree then please say so. If not,

4268:

Actually that's not correct. He did not call Mr. Farmer "a far left-wing zealot". He said that's what Mr. Farmer had admitted himself to be. As I explained, a simple request for a diff would have sufficed. As for the "whole passage" being "derogatory", that is just your opinion, and it is clearly not

3323:

I don't see how we get out of the ideological mess until people stop bringing a 'new' debate on the same issue every other week. As for the idea, a 'project coordinator' - which seems a lot like what Lionelt already does - why rank one member above the rest? Putting a single figure in authority seems

2028:

I wouldn't consider the Cold War (on its own) ever part of this project, to be honest. And Reagan's speech is conservative by being the product of someone who referred to himself as conservative...or at least that's how I worked it out. However, it could be changed again to include all that...the key

523:

Your protection of this project is honorable but strident. The half dozen editors that are constantly being threatened with excommunication are not out to destroy the project. Granted they want to mold it and shape it and have it reflect what they think. How is that different than elsewhere at WP? I

397:

This pause in the in-fighting may be a good time to make a well-intended request. While suspicions of the intended goals of certain editors may have a place in individual articles, a project of this size and conviction cannot constantly ask its members and interested guests to hold their tongues. The

5418:

to go back a step to the Swiss party in question--many RS are explicit that it is "conservative". for example: a) "the conservative right — led by the Swiss People's Party and also composed of some minor, more radical right-wing parties- — has been doubling its share of the vote during this period."

5162:(SVP) in the project, even though sources say it has abandoned conservatism. Lionelt said that if a single reliable source called a group conservative then it belonged in the project. My question to Lionelt is why is the SVP acceptable while the KKK is not? (BTW the KKK in Canada was close to the 4992:

I'm obviously a member of this project, and I think that line of argument is a bit offensive since I've worked more on project articles then most other members. I have not sought to "redefine" the project but rather to refine its vague definition, which may or may not include all anti-communists and

4854:

to be problematic. Using RS presents a lot of difficulties in general, as you can see If you look at notability guideline pages etc. Much depends on the context in which RS are used. The New York Times might seem to be a copper-bottomed RS for most things, but obviously not for microbial taxonomies.

4638:

It's not clear which assertion you're calling "false". However the issue is whether, during significant parts of its history, the KKK has been considered to be conservative or closely connected to conservatives or conservatism, not which U.S. political party it was connected to. Anyone with a decent

2052:

RGloucester's 3rd Version: Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all social and political entities (and products of those entities) that refer to themselves as "conservative". It also includes entities, thought, theories etc, that are incontestably labeled "conservative" by verifiable 3rd

5249:

Yes, I agree with WB that the comment was nearly a personal attack. Regarding my goal: I have worked against what I perceived as Lionelt's desire to gather a minion for making POV changes to articles: vote stacking. I nominated the project for deletion so that I would not have to stay so very alert

4824:

You've taken my comment about overkill out of context. You'll see that just a few lines later I also wrote, "let's go for broke and see if we can get the project up to 30,000 articles." You didn't disagree with that proposal. How large should the project be, and would adding one more article put it

4128:

on the grounds that they were "derogatory...about another contributor" makes me uneasy, not least because I didn't see them as derogatory about Will or any contributor in particular but rather as a blustering and (IMO) somewhat peculiar attempt to contradict the content of Will's post. (If you want

3357:

Really, though, unless people stop attacking the scope of this project, I think this will end up at the Arbitration Comittee eventually - and I don't think anyone wants to bring sanctions into the mix. My proposal? If you don't like this project or its scope, nobody is keeping you from leaving - so

2791:

Whilst it is noble to attempt to split the project as such, that has clearly been deemed unacceptable by members of said project. Rather than attempting to do something that will never be allowed by the "establishment", perhaps we should focus on attempting to define the scope in a fair manner that

2103:

That's a little better, but "products of those entities" may not make sense. If we add Ronald Reagan, as a self-described conservative, do we therefore add every speech he gave and every law he signed? Maybe it'd be better to say something like, "Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all

805:

It is not possible for a group of editors to collaborate on a project unless there is a general understanding about the subject matter of the project. That does not mean that different editors cannot have different opinions. For example, editors involved in a North America project may disagree on

5078:

Hello User:Will Beback, my apologies, I was not aware that you are a part of WikiProject Conservatism. I can still see why others, such as User:Lionelt would remove the tag from the article on the KKK. To add a WikiProject Conservatism banner on the KKK article is analogous to adding a WikiProject

4579:

describing it conservative is included." There is no indication whatsoever of conservatism in the KKK article. You expended a bit of effort to unearth a "tangential" connection. If the project is too big, as you say, why are you adding articles? If you oppose tangentially connected topics, why are

4046:

I'm from London, and I find this project appauling. The type of people that appear on the portal that come up are not conservatives like we have! Do you think david cameron would not allow same-sex parternships? Do you think david cameron would get rid of abortion? Do you think david cameron truly

3837:

Yes, agree with NuclearWarfare. I've done some work on Military History and that project functions very well with the system they have. I'm very happy with Lionelt's direction at this time. I think he's done an excellent job pulling things together and he has a great deal of experience. As the

1357:

as a roadmap: what's so monumental about that? Other editors may not agree with your scope after you've done it, but at least you would be respected for producing one, and we would have a basis for a discussion based on good, rather than bad, faith. No-one is regarded seriously in politics if they

158:

The "religious ties" that that party has (which is not any kind of important party, for the record) are simply restoring the Roman Catholic Clergy to the First Estate, that is their land owners under the ancien regime which it wants to restore. And believe me, no one in France wants to restore the

5653:

The klan offends many conservatives. Some "liberals" like to paint intense conservatives with the same brush they do the klan. But the klan follows its own agenda and if a new way of behavior, radically new, helps them reach their goals, they have no interest in being conservative. I realize that

5475:

I would exclude extremist parties, (which reject political values like democracy) but INCLUDE "right wing populist" parties in Europe. (In the US, the Tea Party Movement, altho not a "political party" does fit the "right-wing populist" mold, & I consider the Tea Party to be "conservative". (I

5281:

My purpose here is the same as everyone else's should be: to collaborate on improving Knowledge (XXG) articles. Please do not make accusations to the contrary unless you're willing to support them with proof, and please don't refer to my remarks here as "whining". As a matter of fact, i have made

5044:

Well, usually a project banner should be placed on the article if the project itself is willing to work on it. Since WP:Conservatism is not willing to do so, the banner was probably rightly removed by User:Lionelt. Besides, the article on the KKK seems to be covered by a plethora of more relevant

4729: 4242:

He violated WP:BLP by calling Brian Farmer "a far-left wing zealot" -- that is totally false and Wiki rules say it MUST be supported and unsupported derogatory comments about living people MUST be immediately removed. The whole passage is derogatory and Wiki rules are the guideline here (not free

4021:

RGloucester has a track record of some moderate and intelligent comments here. Also he is an American and so possibly more acceptable to American members, while the fact he lives in Europe means he can understand non-American perspectives. However since I contacted him he's explained that he is a

2440:

Will Beback's modified version: "Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all political and social topics that are either self-described as "conservative", described as "conservative" by multiple reliable sources, or are otherwise closely connected to conservatism, recognising the diverse

1930:

I've adapted it to broaden to the scope. I had never meant to limit it. I simply want to limit misconceptions, and that's what I'm trying to do here. My proposal now states "all social and political entities", which in my view includes publications, theories, individuals, political parties, NGOs,

732:

I view proposals to delete or break up this project unfavorably. AGF or not, I am skeptical of editors who wish to destroy this group. Btw, there are 66 editors on the About Us roster, and another 4 who added the project userbox to their userpage but did not add themselves to the register. That's

5916:

This is not the Republican Party project. In the late 19th century the Republicans were the more progressive party and the Democratic Party was more conservative in many respects. In any case, Farmer is one of many scholars and commentators who consider one or more iterations of the Klan to be a

5539:

Scholars consider conservative extremism to be part of conservatism. Either this project follows the path laid out by scholars, or it's just the cherry-picked interests of anonymous Knowledge (XXG) editors. Do editors here support changing the name of the project to "Mainstream Conservatism"? If

4299:

Most Wikipedians have discovered that if you feed the trolls, it makes it worse. It's a waste of time to try to potty train them. the statement that Framer admitted he was a "a far left-wing zealot" is a derogatory statement--it is a lie and a total fabrication. and it's unsourced. Wiki has zero

4249:

Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from

3629:

of any project's coordinators is the maintenance and housekeeping work", you want a coordinator to "cast the deciding vote." The only thing we ever talk about here is (1) do we get rid of the Americans or (2) keep the Americans and get rid of everybody else? Is this the deciding vote that you're

3391:

This could be a good direction to take, but it depends wholly on the existence of one editor who can pick up the role and run with it. Who is that? Until such an editor steps forward, throws his or her hat in ring, the proposal can only be rhetorical. WikiProjects require strong personalities as

1380:

to define conservatism - we have reliable sources for that". Could Toa please provide these sources, because we have rs that Putin, a racist party in Switzerland, the KKK, liberals in Belize, etc. are all conservatives, but have no criteria for inclusion. There are sources that Roosevelt was a

5512:

Perhaps "Extremist" can be vague at times. But I see nothing vague in klan sponsored terror and lynchings, cross-burnings, etc. The klan may have a rosier side, but I can understand why people don't won't the klan included in their conservative project. If project socialism did not want similar

2655:

Well, I certainly agree that a smaller project could actually be more effective. But that said, if the US electorate tends to favor conservative political parties then it's hard to avoid dealing with that fact. Better to make a more general limitation, like focusing on just politics rather than

1339:

is not true conservatism, that is is liberalism and should not be merged with worldwide conservatism. That scope is doomed. Unnecessary because broad scopes are permitted, even recommended by the WikiProject guidelines. Any change to the existing scope which breaks up this group of editors will

3584:

The subpages and templates of this project are complex and sophisticated. It would be advantageous if the coodinator understood html, CSS, transclusion, templates, parser functions, etc. We should also look at who has recruited the most members, tagged the most articles, and published the most

5092:

I'm not sure what liberalism would have to do with Mass killings under Communist regimes but it is a tagged as part of the socialism wikiproject, which makes perfect sense. Per the numerous sources listed above, the Klan was a conservative group, with conservative members and which supported

4210:

The IP says that the proposed source is a self-described far-left zealot. The collegial response would be to (1) ask for a supporting diff (2) ask the IP to strike the statement if no supporting diff is forthcoming and (3) strike the statement if the IP fails to do so. The IP uses the phrase

3689:

Lionelt, you cannot show past performance stats to prove you are the only one qualified to coordinate the project. That would be like Obama listing his official presidential actions to prove Gingrich could not be president—Gingrich has performed no official presidential actions. Kleinzach is

5250:

against such a strategy. On the other hand, when the project takes a neutral stance and simply improves articles I am satisfied with its work. I approve of the widening of its scope to include articles about topics that are not palatable but are certainly under the auspices of conservatism.

2145:

Will Beback's version: "Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all political, social and religious topics that are either self-described as "conservative", described as "conservative" by reliable sources, or are otherwise closely connected to conservatism, recognising the diverse

1449:@ TFD...I started the thread "Responding.......". I choose perceived so I wouldn't get into an argument with whomever as to whether the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" comments were in fact threats. There was no assumption of bad faith on my part. I can't speak for anyone else. 1334:

category. To undertake an effort, a year after the fact, to overlay a detailed, specific scope on top of a project which has grown in this manner is a monumental and unnecessary challenge. Monumental because there will never be agreement on the langauge. E.g. TFD will always insist that

5766:

If this group wants to exclude an article that is ostensibly within the scope then it is our prerogative. If this group want to exclude an article because it makes us "look bad" or any other reason it is entirely within our prerogative. If an article is brought here for discussion of

683:

desires to leave and form their own WikiProject. Why destroy or break up this one when you can create your own? No one is making you join this project, which you clearly disagree with. No one is keeping you from forming your own. Why do you insist on attempting to break up or destroy

3445:

The maintenance refers to keeping the subpages up to date, and keeping the various departments functioning such as Assessment, Collaboration, etc. We could get a feel for who would be a good coordinator by looking at contributions to the very pages he/she/it would be maintaining:

5184:

The aren't actually linked, but you're right that we should seek to formulate and apply a consistent standard. Trying to find a consensus on each individual inclusion, without any guidelines, isn't practical when the project could include thousands or tens of thousands of pages.

3896:

Is this the smell of a coup d'Etát? I think it is... the problem here is not Lionelt, who is doing quite a good job. The problem is that there are a few editors who should be focused on improving conservative-related articles and not on trying to mess this WikiProject. That's all.

1823:

Conservatives in most of the world generally do not call themselves conservative because the term has negative connotations - it means reactionary. Similarly, some on the extreme right call themselves conservative because it is more acceptable than alternative descriptions.

5457:. When Ware wrote, he included the SVP as conservative, but it is now considered right-wing populist. All these parties are often called conservative. Does right-wing populism fall within the scope of this project and, if so, do we include far right parties, such as the 3774:

I have, perhaps, made five edits on conservative articles. Another person has started the project and has hundreds of edits. In a civil world, a vote is not needed. After all is discussed, argued, etc. I will defer to experience. I am not against voting for a coordinator.

2104:

political, social and religious topics that are either self-described as "conservative", described as "conservative" by reliable sources, or are otherwise closely connected to conservatism, recognising the diverse interpretations of what that appellation may refer to."

3789:

Rather than one person, why not consider a council of three. Lionel and two others. All major decisions would have to be approved by the three, in consensus. The three should not all be in the same "camp" but should represent a cross-section of editors. Just an idea.

5702:

inclusion, per Lionel, NYYankees51, Anupam and DonaldRichardSands. The KKK article does not describe the Klan as "conservative". It uses the word exactly twice, one of those in a footnote. Lionel's action is correct; and, it makes the project scope more precise:

4734:

The underlying objective of the KKK was to facilitate the Conservatives' return to political power. In effect, the Klan functioned as the terrorist wing of the Conservative Party. Many prominent Conservatives helped to organize the Klan, and some numbered among the

4876:

Indeed. But the sources listed above are directly relevant to the issue of political and sociological affiliations. However I disagree that relying on RS is problematic. Knowledge (XXG) is built on a foundation of reliable sources, without which we have nothing.

4414:

Another illustration of the need for a project scope definition? This one could go either way. If Lionelt thinks conservatism is centre-right not far-right, perhaps he can propose this? I'd be happy to support such a position, if it led to some clarification.

316:

The CPC was originally a revolutionary party, but during the past 30 years it has become increasingly conservative (in Chinese: 保守的 baoshoude), emphasizing the maintenance of public order based on the rule of (communist party) law. This brings it in line with

4722: 4515:

the problem is that there are three entirely different groups that used the KKK name. The current KKK--small and violent--has no conservative connections. But KKK-#1 (1860s) and KKK-#2 (1920s) were indeed conservative according to most RS I have seen.

437:

And those requests are the best alternative. If you don't like a project, why hold actual work up? It's a request to 'agree to disagree', one to allow both parties to get back to work. These continuous discussions harm legitimate work, not help them.

2727:

in the USSR. This article is now like a project on Progressivism which includes every article that mentions "progress". Let me toss out a different scope, for discussion: "Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage of topics related to the modern

2449:

If one source describes a group as conservative then so will multiple sources. We need to establish the degree of acceptance. For example if a group has 1,500,323 Google hits and 12 describe it as conservative then that may not be sufficient.

5264:

It's not a personal attack, it's questioning your purposes here. For all the whining about the scope, none of you have actually proposed a well-defined scope or shown any interest in working to create one. At least to the best of my knowledge.

4737: 4758: 4751: 4744: 506:

The issue is that American conservatism is a type of liberalism - it supports limited government, capitalism and separation of church and state, and this project confuses that with support of monarchy, aristocracy and the established church.

4714: 853:

It would be helpful if you could explain what the scope is. I notice we have had discussions about including the Swiss People's Party, the Ku Klux Klan and United Russia - but no agreement because the scope of the project is undefined.

1589:

RGloucester's Version: Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all political organizations and movements that refer to themselves as "conservative", whilst recognizing the diverse interpretations of what that appellation refers

1976:

RGloucester's Second Version: Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all social and political entities that refer to themselves as "conservative", whilst recognizing the diverse interpretations of what that appellation refers

5083:. Both the KKK and Communist régimes are "far-right" and "far-left" groups that one might not want to associate with mainstream Conservatism and Liberalism, respectively. I hope you are understand where I am coming from. Respectfully, 3150:

of Rick Perry's "Strong" ad. I do not have the time to help out with the article right now and I was wonder if some of you could help out there. Lots of work needs to be done but it is good DYK material and could potentially be a GA.

4933:

What is the relevance of Canada? It's my understanding that this project covers conservatism around the world. It's possible that an excerpt may be out of context - I grabbed them hurriedly. But that would not change the equation.

4003:? Do you remember writing "Obviously the coordinator should not be a controversial character"? If trying to break up this group and orphaning the non-American members isn't controversial I don't know what is. You probably think that 1099:

B7's Version I...The scope of Project:Conservatism lies in the interest of consolidating diverse Conservative thought and various Conservative Movements and Conservative social expressions that have existed over time throughout the

5654:

labeling the klan conservative, or not, is controversial. But most, if not all, contemporary conservatives distance themselves from klan ways. To include the klan in the conservative movement is to misrepresent the movement, IMO.

5300:

Sorry that I'm wrong about you. But Binksternet nominated the project for deletion and TFD !voted to delete, then they both stayed in the project after the nomination failed. It's not unreasonable to question their purposes here.

5673:, below. If you think the project should be limited, then you might want to comment down there. As it is, many articles are included which are not part of the conserviative movement at all, includung the French royal family, the 524:

am familiar wih some of them. You would be well served to not turn a blind ear to their communications. They are not nonsense peddlers. Again, my simple request is that you restrain your tendency to call for their expulsion. TY.

2833:

There is almost nothing which is "incontestable". That language would also have the effect of drastically shrinking the scope of this project, though it would require a lot of article-by-article investigation and discussion.

5423:(2005) p 27; b) "This vote was likely seen as an endorsement of the Swiss People's Party and was likely to lead it to push forward its conservative agenda, including more conservative policies in general" from George Ritzer, 1563:

Then, after having that, I'd make a space below that stating the "classical definition" used in most of the world along with the more modern American version. That way there would be no confusion, and misconceptions could be

5427:(2009) p 310; c) "The Swiss People's Party is a nationalist, conservative party, gaining votes with populist, xenophobic and nationalist policies not very different from other European right wing parties." from Georg Lutz, 4719:

Many top men in the Klan were Conservatives ("The Klan leaders openly proclaim their adherence to the Conservative Party," said one contemporary newspaper report14) and a good number of leading Conservatives were Klansmen.

3021:

The idea of spinning off an American Conservatism project is turning into a perennial proposal. Will Beback's modified version is the best I have seen so far because it allows for work to be done on the global conservatism

4008: 3980:@Klein: let's set aside for the moment the obvious widespread opposition to your suggestion that we elect a coordinator... I have to ask: the person you feel is best qualified to be the coordinator of WPConservatism is 3306:

Incidentally, besides the 73 edits you've made to this talkpage, how many edits have you made to WikiProject Conservatism project pages, portal pages, templates? (Putting yourself on the member roster doesn't count.) –

421:

With all due respect, these accusations are due to the fact this project is under fire every other week, be it a deletion nomination, a move request, or a request to either kick out the Americans or kick out everybody

2722:

That'd be another way of focusing the scope more sharply. But there's a fundamental problem with creating a project based on a vague concept. I was just reading about the conservative, pro-Stalin opposition to the

1931:

etc....Please work with me here, and be constructive, instead of just slapping a "strongly oppose" on the top. I'm trying genuinely to make a change that I will think will benefit Knowledge (XXG) and the project.

1560:

Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all political organizations and movements that refer to themselves as "conservative", whilst recognizing the diverse interpretations of what that appellation refers

4228:@TFD: The tone of discussion on this project's pages has been lowered a lot further by other participants than by the IP. If "lowering the tone" is legitimate grounds for deletion (is it?), why start with the IP? 1251:

Which one begs the question? Buster7's or the answer from the main page? Do you have an interpretation or scope to present for discussion? Let us collaborate to formulate a scope that is more than just an agenda.

4300:

tolerance for unsourced derogatory comments per WP:BLP . The whole passage was designed to be derogatory, to ridicule Knowledge (XXG), its editors, its content, and its reliance on Farmer. (for example he wrote:

670:

I'm not getting into the semantics of conservatism with you, TFD. I support the scope of this project and you don't support it at all, given your delete vote. It is not rude or impolite to ask people who want to

5403:

Not at all. We are trying to determine the criteria for inclusion in the project. The KKK is definitely considered conservative under some criteria. Can you explain what criteria you believe should be used?

3998:

Are you aware that his account is 18 days old? Are you aware that he has 331 total edits? Is this your idea of what you call a "mop-carrying" editor? Are you aware that this is the same RGloucester who tried to

557:'expulsion' of dozens of hard-working editors, be it through deletion or decreasing the scope. With all due respect, I'll stop calling for them to leave as soon as they stop calling for dozens of editors to be 3808:

I'm not involved in this project, but if I may: Wikiproject Coordinators and Directors in my experience generally only work successfully if the project if very active, e.g. Military History or (analogously)

3167:

The editor would have to personally invite us to edit the subpage and guarantee that they wouldn't delete our edits (they have ultimate control over content in their own userspace, with some exceptions). –

1278:

to define conservatism - we have reliable sources for that. Rather than unilaterally declaring 'X' to be conservative and 'Y' to not be, we can let the reliable sources 'confirm' something as conservative.

5668:

DRS - Currently, the consensus seems to be that the scope of this wikiproject is not limited to the conservative movement, which is generally considered to be an American movement begun in the 1950s. Se

5129:

Anupam, anybody you encounter on this talk page should be accorded the respect of a fellow editor, not hounded for supposed membership. Regarding membership, anybody who takes part in a WikiProject is a

4302:

our youth are being exposed to this "wiki-history" and our true history is being systematically erased, thanks in large part to Knowledge (XXG) and their tolerance of being taken over by leftist zealots.

4269:

supported by the content of the whole passage, as I have already explained. And unless you are an administrator (are you?), you don't have the power to "initiate blocking procedures" (time for an Rfa?).

1474:

B7's Version II...The scope of Project:Conservatism lies in the interest of consolidating diverse conservative thought and various conservative movements that have existed over time throughout the world.

564:

I will note that they have enough numbers to form a WikiProject that fits their views - the minimum to form one is five. They do not have to do anything with this project to get their views represented.

5231:

I consider that close to a personal attack. I've done nothing to disrupt this project and doing so certainly is not my goal. Please avoid making negative personal remarks about your fellow editors.

4573:. Previously you wrote "This project has already achieved overkill ... even the tagging of a tangentially connected topic is defended at length." The point you're trying to prove is that "any article 1231:

Answer from FAQ...A: As stated on the main page of this project, we are dedicated to improving articles related to conservatism, not limited to any particular form or national variety of conservatism.

4639:

knowledge of American history knows that the Democratic and Republican parties of the 19th century bear little resemblance to their current selves, so political affiliation is besides the point.

2381:

I agree that Will Beback's version's is the best drafted so far, however I suggest tightening the RS criteria and omitting religion (as offering up an unnecessary hostage to future fortunes). --

913:

The FAQ is inadequate IMO. Who wrote it? I've searched the archives and I can't find any record of the FAQ being proposed or discussed. If I am correct, the FAQ is not backed by any consensus. --

140:

I can find no independant confirmation that this party exists. "Restoring" the monarchy, which is the main issue of this website, is not a part of either American or Canadian conservatism.

3735:

Wait, what? Why can he not show that he already does all that stuff anyway - seems like a good argument to me! Unless you can prove that his work on those is sloppy or bad, you can't pull an

4047:

cares one ounce about religon? NO! And neither does none of the UK. This project is totally stupid, and should not monopolize the name conservatism when it knows nothing about how it is.

3632:

In any event, per WPCouncil, we are not a good candidate for a coordinator because (1) we do not have taskforces (2) the project is already "managed effectively by the project members." –

2581:

Exactly right — which is why I've never thought a project definition based just on RS was really viable. (RS are for referencing articles, not for validating publishing collaborations.) --

5513:

terror groups included in their socialism project, I have no argument with them. I agree with LionelT that members of the group, through consensus, can decide how to manage the project.

4318:

Trolls and potty training, eh? Now who's being derogatory and lowering the tone? Lol. Breaking off from dialogue here that has nothing to do with improving the article, and replying at

3954:

Size is not the only consideration. This is a particularly non-consensual group of people. I think that means we have to be a bit more formal in the way we approach decision making. --

1033:

the adoption of his FAQ? Perhaps in a new topic? I think that would be more elegant than one of us simply removing all the questions. It would be better to consider them one by one. --

5940:, per guideline posted by Lionel. If our WikiProject is opposed to its inclusion under us, then we should be the ones who keep it off, and its inclusion need not be forced upon us. -- 634:

There is no 'inactive and former members' list given, so there are probably less than 66. Members who have not been on WP at all for the past three months should go on such a list. --

4441:, the consensus seemed to be that a single source calling an entity "conservative" is sufficient. Whatever criteria we use it should be fairly objective and consistently applied. 1326:

What would a scope look like which keeps the existing membership intact, and includes all currently tagged articles? It would look like exactly what we have now: a wikilink to the

950:

What should we do with it? If it's never been proposed or approved, maybe we should remove it to a discussion topic (on this page) so people can express their opinions about it? --

5722:

Then I assume you'd approvie of its inclusion if the article did say it was conservative, an inclusion which would be well-supported by the above list of excerpts from sources.

656:

Toa, how do you know that anyone disagrees with you? You have never explained what you think conservatism is, and therefore no one knows if they disagree with your definition.

4712:

Another more extremist, nativist organization that affected rural America and that represented the viewpoint of some socially conservative Americans was the Ku Klux Klan (KKK).

1064:

though perhaps he may reconsider? Maybe it would be best to sort out the scope first? That will obviate at least one of the FAQ problems. We can come back to this afterwards. --

97: 125:

It sounds similar to what we see of conservatism in North America. It is obviously has some religious ties with the Roman Catholic Church. How strong is it in French politics?

1171: 89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 3431:

Predictable, Klein. Pretty predictable. Am I imagining things or was it just a couple of hours ago that you accused me of dictatorial aspirations. Well... WP:FILMC says "The

4770:

We have many sources which describe the Klan (at least some iterations of it) as conservative. If we don't include it then we need to rethink the scope of this project.

2237:

A version per Kleinbach's "see here" of 07:35 14 Dec 2011 above:WikiProject Conservatism is a group dedicated to improving Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of topics related to

3856: 3596: 1330:

article. When I founded this project almost a year ago my inspiration was the conservatism article. The roadmap I used for the thousands of articles I have tagged is the

3037:

I've never heard of the 'global conservatism movement'. Do you have a reference? Incidentally we can include the present masthead in the approval process. Here it is. --

553:

The issue isn't me calling for 'expulsion' (which is, in reality, a request for them to leave, not one to remove them forcibly), it is the fact they are calling for the

1129:

Why should the project devote itself to consolidation? Also what do you mean by Conservative social expressions? What have these got to do with a political project? --

434:), and some editors on here have ruined my good faith. This isn't an issue of over-management, it is one of protecting this project from those that seek to neuter it. 3488: 2923:

We've rejected that idea in the move proposal. By extension, we have rejected a scope that would cause the same result. This is beating a dead horse and you know it.

806:

which countries form part of North America, but may agree on the countries that are included in the project. What do you think should be the scope of this project?

4763:

Women belonged to numerous patriotic organisations in the 1920s, but perhaps none as conservative as the Knights of Kamelia and the Women of the Ku Klux Klan (WKKK).

3526: 3358:

it might be best to do so. While disagreements are healthy, if you oppose the very basis of the project, why did you join? It's the best for all involved parties.

3250:

This project has difficulty building consensus — we can all agree on that, right? Leaving contentious ideological matters to one side, perhaps we can take a more

1645:

What about, all parties and political writing that are generally considered to be conservative, particularly following in the traditions of Burke and DeMaistre.

372: 3564: 5167: 478:, could you possibly stop step-indenting your messages? Conversations become difficult to read if there appear to be extra non-signing participants. Thanks. -- 4062:

So there are no social conservatives in the UK? Does that mean there are none elsewhere in the world? You can have different sorts of conservatives, you know.

3331:"The project coordinators are . . . not, however, endowed with any special executive powers, nor with any authority over article content or editor conduct." 550:

think, not what the rest of the 70+ members of this project think. The will of six members should not supplant the will of dozens and dozens of other members.

1534:

It was only a starting point. Instead of picking mine apart, I challenge you to come up with your own. I'm just trying to move us from this quarrelsomeness.

3507: 3283: 2601:

I can find multiple reliable sources describing each and every modern Democratic president as a conservative, does that mean they belong in the project?

4580:

you adding tangentially connected topics? I have always valued your contributions, Will, but this path you're following I find surprising and alarming.–

4814:

says do not disrupt the project to illustrate a point. How would adding a group which is widely considered conservative by scholars disrupt the project?

4000: 3545: 47: 17: 4756:

Women of the Klan, like other conservative women's groups, saw no contradiction between political activism and their defense of women's maternal roles.

5917:

conservative movement. The partisan tone of the above posting is unhelpful to resolve issues concerning what purports to be a non-partisan project.

3202:

The archivebot is set to archive threads over a month old. Rather than archiving manually it might be better to just lower the archiving threshold.

3183:

This page has become huge. Some discussions are a month old. Would anyone object if I did some archiving (chronologically by last date of course). --

4899:

Will, that list of sources serves to convince me the Ku Klux Klan has been considered conservative by enough observers to merit the project banner.

4497:

The KKK meets Lionelt's criteria for inclusion by having a single reliable source that calls it conservative. Also, the 1920s Klan and the modern

2732:." The majority of tagged articles are probably related to the American Conservative movement, and it's a fairly discrete but still large topic. 2053:

party sources, i.e. academic journals. Whilst doing this, the project recognises the diverse interpretations of what that appellation may refer to.

598:

argument? No, the project is shaped by those who speak up and lead. You calling for people to leave if they don't like it is not helping anything.

4915:

Several of the citations deal with Canada, where the Canadian KKK was close to the Canadian Conservative party. One citation is plain misleading.

4065:

Also, "conserative" is a political ideology, independant of party. I would think the UK Catholics denied the right to handle adoptions would care.

1725:

It's as good as we're going to come up with, and I daresay fairly close to the intent of most Project members. Let us embrace this definition. /

2966:

When we have completed drafting possible definitions, can we start 'approval ivoting', i.e. endorsing the version(s) we think are satisfactory?

321:, the bedrock of east Asian conservatism, that teaches respect for tradition and obedience to superiors for the achievement of social harmony. ( 5461:

which Ware would have grouped with the extreme right? Do we also include Christian Democrats and Liberals who are described as conservative?

4159:

I agree with Writegeist - IP's comments should be included. No direct personal attack was made, and no language was used. No reason to remove.

3817:. Is there any pressing reason that this project needs a coordinator? If not, you all might be better served by continuing as you always have. 2899:

Will Beback's alternate proposal ('American' wording): "Project:American conservatism aims to provide coverage of topics related to the modern

2469:

Yes indeed, if the project continues to place such importance on RS-based bannering, then a well-drafted project guideline may be necessary. --

3770:

Knowledge (XXG) is built upon civility. This means, among other things, respect and positive regard. Thus our discussions will be respectful.

287:

It seems to be a return to some of the principles of Disraeli's One Nation conservatism, although it is probably more rhetoric than reality.

5080: 4679:

Ah, thanks for clarifying that. Actually, it looks like the editor moved his comment to the end of this thread, where I responded as well.

5877:. It's quite different from the Nazi Party. The relevant issue for this project is that it was heavily involved in conservative politics. 4802:

adding articles? Since I did you the courtesy of responding to your direct question, I would appreciate a response to my direct question. –

3469: 2006:

And so on. Self-description is a fine idea in some contexts, but I don't see how it can be applied to a practical scope for this project.

5903: 5011:

In the future, I suggest we stick to discussing articles and other conservatism-related issues, and avoid discussing individual editors.

4533:

Article inclusion is determined on a case by case basis. If the consensus of the membership is to include KKK then so be it. Here we go...

4154: 4048: 3064:

Present version: "WikiProject Conservatism is a group dedicated to improving Knowledge (XXG)'s coverage of topics related to conservatism."

2241:, a political and social philosophy that promotes maintaining traditional institutions, while supporting limited and gradual social change. 1005:

Apparently added by Lionelt 28 July, 2011 "(added FAQ which hopefully will address recurring issues and lessen contention on talk page)".

426:

the Americans. It is rather hard to assume good faith when a particular group of editors support each and every one of these requests. I

5859:

The KKK mimics the Nazi Socialist Party which was a socialist fascist organization. Socialism and fascism are not conservative values.

5060:

Speak for yourself. We've obviously been working on this article. How many of the project's 3000+ articles have you been working on?

1404:

Beginning a discussion thread with the caption "Responding to perceived threats" may reasonably be seen as an assumption of bad faith.

208: 5163: 4068:

I am also of the understanding the what is called "conservative" in the US is often given the term "liberal" (not leftist) in Europe.

3991: 2900: 2776: 2729: 1908:

What's the problem with having a smaller project? A smaller project would allow more focus on the content that needs improvement.

2637:. (That's also indicated by the repeated discussions about project banners, and the attention paid to banners in the FAQ above.) -- 5641: 257:

Arguably, the Conservatives are to the left of the Democrats in the USA, though they are now in coalition with the centre-left

4850:. This one seems to be perpetually arguing about its scope. Given the wide usage of the word 'conservative', relying on RS is 2810:

Can you draft a new version of the modified text including your suggestions? I've tried to do so but it looks rather wordy. --

4145:

The edit refers to other editors as "WP liberal gatekeepers" which is a personal attack and lowers the tone of discussion.

1197:

Not a bad idea. This could retain the current broadness of the project. I'm not going to support just yet, but a good idea.

3585:

newsletter articles. Who do you think is most qualified to do the "maintenance and housekeeping work" around here Klein? –

3435:

of the project coordinators is the maintenance and housekeeping work." Interestingly Klein, there's nothing in FILMC about

2489:

Google hits are a very bad of of determining anything. Whatever we do, we should not be thinking of Ghits as part of it.

4819:

At the very least, "UDP has been described as conservative" by at least one RS. That is more than enough for this project.

4742:

White conservatives' success at turning Klan attacks into lynchings signals the importance of language in Reconstruction.

1733: 3115:

While doing this, the project recognizes the diverse interpretations of what the appellation "conservative" may refer to.

5659: 5518: 3795: 3780: 3147: 2283:

Of the seven available options, I think User:Will's provides the best opportunity to satisfy the broadbased membership.

340:

and others have strong Confucian overtones ( see the Economist article, 'Ideology in China: Confucius makes a comeback'

197: 130: 2029:

bit is that the project's scope should recognize just how diverse interpretations of the word "conservative" can be.

5945: 3913: 326: 4972:: Off topic. The subject is Ku Klux Klan. Once again, please don't use these discussions to make personal attacks. -- 5707:

hate groups (like the Klan) and groups as far out of the mainstream as the KKK will not come under the umbrella. --

5315:

I've said it before: I'm here for the same reason your car has brakes. Action is not equivalent to useful progress.

5210:

discussion. It seems the only goal of Will Beback, TFD, and Binksternet at this project is to disrupt the project.

3736: 38: 5817: 5588: 4727:

The Klansman is usually a conservative member of Southern society. The Ku Klux Klansman is always a conservative.

4175: 3755: 3670: 3374: 3008: 2939: 2868: 2709: 1895: 1295: 1213: 932:

I've never understood how editors write FAQs containing answers to questions that have never been asked before.

884: 840: 792: 708: 581: 454: 5466: 5409: 5376: 5175: 4506: 4304:) And indeed any editor can call for a person to be blocked (only an administrator can do the actual blocking). 4150: 2775:

Will Beback's alternate proposal: "Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage of topics related to the modern

2606: 2455: 1829: 1650: 1504: 1409: 1386: 1242: 1012: 859: 811: 661: 512: 380: 292: 218: 145: 4190:

You cannot use this "Brian Farmer" guy who clearly admits himself to be a far-left wing zealot as a "Historian"

3281:

Good morning and thank you. Reactions? P.S. For an explanation of how coordinators work, see the Films Project:

5966: 5949: 5930: 5911: 5907: 5890: 5868: 5847: 5825: 5789: 5771: 5735: 5717: 5690: 5663: 5645: 5596: 5565: 5553: 5522: 5505: 5485: 5470: 5440: 5413: 5380: 5324: 5310: 5295: 5274: 5259: 5244: 5219: 5198: 5179: 5143: 5106: 5087: 5073: 5049: 5024: 5006: 4985: 4960: 4947: 4924: 4908: 4890: 4868: 4838: 4806: 4783: 4692: 4672: 4652: 4633: 4610: 4584: 4564: 4544: 4525: 4510: 4490: 4471: 4454: 4428: 4408: 4367: 4331: 4313: 4294: 4278: 4261: 4237: 4205: 4183: 4107: 4077: 4056: 4035: 4015: 3967: 3949: 3934: 3890: 3847: 3832: 3825: 3799: 3784: 3763: 3722: 3702: 3678: 3636: 3620: 3589: 3423: 3401: 3382: 3350: 3311: 3300: 3237: 3215: 3196: 3172: 3161: 3136: 3050: 3032: 3016: 2983: 2947: 2876: 2847: 2823: 2801: 2745: 2717: 2669: 2650: 2628: 2610: 2594: 2574: 2540: 2502: 2482: 2459: 2394: 2300: 2195: 2117: 2038: 2019: 1988: 1940: 1921: 1903: 1833: 1786: 1737: 1694: 1654: 1616: 1573: 1551: 1529: 1508: 1492: 1466: 1426: 1413: 1399: 1390: 1371: 1344: 1321: 1303: 1269: 1246: 1221: 1188: 1164: 1142: 1118: 1077: 1046: 1016: 998: 979: 963: 945: 926: 892: 863: 848: 815: 800: 763: 737: 716: 665: 647: 629: 607: 589: 541: 516: 491: 463: 415: 384: 366: 296: 278: 222: 201: 168: 149: 134: 4052: 2674:'That fact' would not be a difficulty if American conservatism had its own project. Separation would address 5810: 5655: 5581: 5514: 4168: 3791: 3776: 3748: 3663: 3367: 3001: 2932: 2861: 2702: 1888: 1288: 1206: 877: 833: 785: 701: 574: 447: 193: 126: 3901: 5941: 5458: 3329:

No, the coordinator serves the project, he's not in authority. To quote from the Films page linked above:

5045:

projects, such as WikiProject Discrimination and WikiProject Terrorism. I hope this helps. With regards,

5924: 5884: 5841: 5783: 5729: 5684: 5547: 5499: 5320: 5306: 5289: 5270: 5255: 5238: 5215: 5192: 5139: 5100: 5067: 5018: 5000: 4941: 4904: 4884: 4832: 4777: 4686: 4646: 4604: 4558: 4498: 4484: 4448: 4402: 4290: 3995: 3985: 3698: 3693:

Kleinzach, this is still only a rhetorical discussion until someone says "I will step up. Vote for me."

3397: 3209: 3132: 2841: 2797: 2739: 2663: 2622: 2568: 2496: 2191: 2111: 2034: 2013: 1984: 1936: 1915: 1780: 1690: 1569: 1354: 1331: 1315: 992: 939: 603: 164: 4011:

wasn't controversial either. This behavior raises serious concerns about your judgment and motives. –

5962: 5864: 5860: 5462: 5405: 5372: 5171: 4502: 4363: 4327: 4274: 4233: 4146: 4138: 3944: 3930: 3843: 3839: 3156: 3027: 2675: 2602: 2561:

I don't disagree with the idea, but I think it's going to be problematic to implement in practice.

2520: 2451: 1825: 1646: 1611: 1500: 1405: 1382: 1238: 1008: 855: 807: 747: 657: 508: 376: 288: 214: 141: 5767:

inclusion/exclusion the consensus rules regardless of the prevailing interpretation of the scope. –

4188:

the removed remarks also violated WP:BLP rules. The author tried to be as derogatory and insulting:

3838:

project progresses we can reevaluate the need to expand the leadership. Let's find our way first.

3651: 3261:(yes, elect) a neutral-minded, 'mop-carrying', project coordinator. His or her tasks might include: 975:: "Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus." – 5708: 5637: 5446: 5159: 4979: 4862: 4501:

both belong to the same political family. Could Lionelt please explain the criteria he is using.

4422: 4196:

This language is "derogatory" and therefore violates Wiki rules and hurts the quality of the work.

4101: 4029: 3961: 3884: 3818: 3716: 3614: 3417: 3344: 3294: 3231: 3190: 3044: 2977: 2817: 2644: 2588: 2534: 2476: 2388: 1523: 1516:— why should a WkiProject be 'consolidating' anything? Wrong word? Deep meaning? Please tell us. -- 1365: 1182: 1136: 1071: 1040: 957: 920: 757: 641: 546:

You note the problem that I address - these half-dozen editors want the project to reflect the way

485: 360: 330: 272: 3410:

We have some able editors here. There are at least a couple of people I'd be happy to nominate. --

3098:

Described as "conservative" by multiple reliable sources in the context of their nation of origin,

2883:

If we are going to consider the 'America only' option I think the project has to be named as such.

5803: 5574: 4161: 3741: 3656: 3360: 3088:

Project:Conservatism aims to provide coverage to all political and social topics that are either:

2994: 2925: 2854: 2695: 2634: 1881: 1281: 1199: 870: 826: 778: 694: 567: 475: 440: 5207: 4811: 4570: 3814: 3265:

soliciting opinions, mediating disputes and 'casting the deciding vote' if opinion is deadlocked

2992:

change... Which means they have effectively no vote under such a system rigged to favor change.

5801:

Per above - also, since nobody really wants to edit this, we have no obligation to support it.

3690:

discussing a future coordinator, so the merits of estimated future performance must be debated.

5834:

That doesn't make any sense. At least three members of the project are already editing it.

5481: 5436: 4920: 4668: 4629: 4521: 4378: 4309: 4257: 4201: 2292: 1730: 1543: 1484: 1458: 1261: 1156: 1110: 1061: 768:

Why should we? We are beating a dead horse every single time we argue over the scope and what

621: 533: 407: 258: 244:). Generally they avoid ideology and emphasize change — from the last government's policies! 3650:

Good points, Lionelt. I was going to support if it was only a maintenance task, such as what

776:

member thinks the other 60 who haven't supported his view are wrong and should be overruled.

431: 5919: 5879: 5836: 5778: 5724: 5679: 5542: 5494: 5316: 5302: 5284: 5266: 5251: 5233: 5211: 5187: 5135: 5095: 5062: 5013: 4995: 4936: 4900: 4879: 4827: 4772: 4681: 4641: 4599: 4553: 4551:

On what basis would you remove a group that is called "conservative" in reliable sources?

4479: 4467: 4443: 4397: 4389: 4286: 4004: 3981: 3694: 3393: 3221: 3204: 3128: 2836: 2793: 2734: 2658: 2633:

Because a huge scope and small band of editors are not going to achieve much except marking

2617: 2563: 2491: 2187: 2106: 2030: 2008: 1980: 1932: 1910: 1775: 1686: 1565: 1310: 987: 934: 599: 160: 5873:

No offense, but based on your comments it appears you haven't actually read the article on

5533:

Conservative Extremism, like other facets of conservatism, is not monolithic, but diverse.

5368: 5364: 4749:

But the Klan attracted followers from every party. Conservatives were the main supporters.

4244: 3810: 427: 5958: 4359: 4323: 4270: 4229: 4134: 3940: 3926: 3909: 3274:

maintaining categories, assessments, and guidelines according to the wishes of the project

3152: 3023: 2724: 1607: 595: 4477:

Perhaps, but that wouldn't affect this project. Articles can be in multiple projects.

1340:

undoubtedly fail. These repetitive and obsessive proposals are exercises in futility. –

5633: 4974: 4857: 4417: 4096: 4073: 4024: 3956: 3879: 3711: 3609: 3412: 3339: 3289: 3226: 3185: 3039: 2972: 2812: 2680: 2639: 2583: 2529: 2471: 2383: 1879:

RGlouster's ill-concieved scope. Would clearly result in a much, much smaller project.

1518: 1360: 1177: 1131: 1066: 1035: 985:

If I read the thread correctly, it no longer has consensus since it is now disputed.

952: 915: 752: 636: 480: 355: 267: 3287:. Incidentally, if my proposal is accepted, I won't be accepting nomination myself. -- 824:

confusion among editors as to what this project covers, your argument is rather weak.

351: 262: 5450: 2678:'s argument that American conservatism is essentially different from other types. -- 692:

to help this project improve conservatism-related articles, all it does is disrupt.

5874: 5768: 5477: 5432: 4969: 4957: 4916: 4803: 4790:

this project should stop expanding?" Well, I didn't ask about a consensus. I asked

4664: 4625: 4581: 4541: 4517: 4305: 4253: 4197: 4121: 4012: 3874: 3633: 3586: 3308: 3169: 2284: 2238: 1726: 1535: 1476: 1450: 1423: 1396: 1350: 1341: 1327: 1253: 1148: 1102: 1026: 976: 743: 734: 613: 525: 399: 318: 5568:

do not help your case any. Whenever you pull some bullcrap like this, it holds up

5158:

The issue of the Klan came up because Lionelt decided to to include the far right

2693:. Nothing is stopping you from doing so. You don't have to slice this project up. 192:

Their listing of values has many similar features to North American conservatism.

4129:

to see what a derogatory remark about another contributor really looks like, try

5776:

Several of the members of the groups are already working on the Klan article.

5449:

party, which is a different political family from conservatism, see for example

5084: 5046: 4463: 4462:

Maybe it might be better to create a parallel project, "right-wing radicalism"?

3334: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2527:

called Conservative, not seldom or occasionally referred to as conservative. --

1558:

To jump back into the fray for a spell, I'd propose something similar to this:

212: 4388:

as a "conservative extremist group", part of a "conservative reaction" to the

3905: 3439: 2988:

Bad idea. People may not want to change the scope, and would thus not support

240:

The governing centre-right Conservative Party has a Policy page of pdfs (see

211:

gained 4,232 votes, or 0.08% of the votes cast, in the 2010 general election.

5564:. We are not obligated to support any page we don't want to support- you're 4087: 4069: 2830:

Actually, it wasn't a proposal to split the project but to narrow its focus.

337: 322: 241: 5628:

saying that " 'has been described as conservative' by at least one RS is

5476:

believe the current KKK is extremist, as are militia movements in the US)

4357: 5674: 4659:

I was responding to a passage that has since been erased by its poster: (

1237:

That is begging the question. Conservatism is defined as conservatism.

4120:

I agree with Will Beback's arguments for inclusion of the KKK. However,

3859:

above, I probably should have put one clause in bold. I'll do that now:

341: 4846:

Hmm. WikiProjects are supposed to be collaborations for working on the

4086:

AFAIK no group in Britain identifies itself as 'social conservatives'.

1499:

IOW, the scope of conservatism is conservatism, but that is circular.

4384:

I added it because the Ku Klux Klan is described in Brian R. Farmer's

4192:

And as for attacks on Wiki contributors, he used language like this: "

4661:

The KKK has always had a history deeply entrenched with Democrats....

3392:

leaders, ideally strong personalities with a neutral point of view.

2003:

Did Reagan's Berlin Speech identify itself as a conservative entity?

310: 120:

This is a translated link to the French (France) Conservative Party.

2186:

Your new version sounds good to me, I'd say it is our best hope.

187:

A translated link of the Czech Conservative Party's list of values

3103:

Are commonly-held to be "conservative" in their nation of origin,

5753:

that they do not wish to support, or prohibited from supporting

234: 746:: Can you address the issue of American conservatism raised by 3862:" . . . co-ordinators are not arbitrators or 'leaders' . . .." 25: 4821:

One source more than enough but nine source are insufficient?

3108:

Are otherwise closely connected to some form of conservatism.

5957:

per the multitude of reliable sources cited by Will Beback.

1349:

Why not draft exactly what you have described? Based on the

4438: 820:

The current scope. Further, unless you can establish there

4593:

Regarding the source, do you think that Brian R. Farmer's

4252:

If he tries it again I will initiate blocking procedures.

2000:

Did the Cold War refer to itself as a conservative entity?

159:

ancien regime. It has been dead for a very long time.

4395:

Obviously, conservative groups can also be extremists.

3925:

Coup d'État? Is that like a Coupe de Ville, only bigger?

1606:

That is one of the fairest ways of defining the scope. --

311:

Website of the Communist Party of China (English version)

3224:

which doesn't archive chronologically (by last date). --

3072:

RGloucester's Modified Version of Will Beback's Version:

4382: 4319: 4130: 4125: 3324:

contrary to the broad and open nature of this project.

2441:

interpretations of what that appellation may refer to."

2146:

interpretations of what that appellation may refer to."

1358:

can't 'lay out their stall' (as they say in England).--

1147:

User:Kleinzach. If you have a better idea let's see it.

1006: 4381:

with the edit summary "far-right is not conservatism".

3939:

KZ this is nowhere big enough to have a coordinator --

3603:

Hope that's clearer. Obviously the coordinator should

2656:including social or religious groups and concepts. 612:

BTW, 66 is not 70+. "I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin."

5134:

member whether or not they formalize the connection.

4590:

I don't understand your objection to adding one more.

3437:"mediating disputes and 'casting the deciding vote.'" 2970:

We can leave the process open for (say) two weeks. --

2852:

Will, your scope was rejected in the moving debate.

4595:

American conservatism: history, theory and practice

4386:

American conservatism: history, theory and practice

3489:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Conservatism/Assessment

3271:

posting notices for the project when necessary etc.

3254:approach to getting the project back on the rails? 4090:can you explain a bit more about what you mean by 3527:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject_Conservatism/Incubator 5540:that's the scope then that should be the name. 3565:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Conservatism/About us 1395:@Klein: to what "bad faith" are you referring? – 4133:.) I'd like to see the IP's comments restored. 5747:A group of editors cannot be forced to support 5745: 3508:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Conservatism/Collab 5421:Direct democratic choice: the Swiss experience 1381:conservative, should we include him as well? 106:Conservative Examples outside of North America 3546:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Conservatism/News 1308:That'd be fine if we actually followed it. 373:New Conservatism (People's Republic of China) 18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Conservatism 8: 4285:I support the removal of the IP talk entry. 5429:Participation, information, and democracy 4116:Removal of IP's comments from KKK section 4115: 3996:user talk:RGloucester#May I nominate you? 2523:'s point still stands. A topic should be 325:himself has been rehabilitated, with the 4569:The basis is that you are attempting to 4377:Lionelt removed the project banner from 3470:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Conservatism 3448: 1418:"@Klein" means what follows is directed 4439:#Labelling of foreign political parties 4194:knee-jerk response by the left-wing..." 4092:""conserative" is a political ideology" 3246:Proposal to elect a project coordinator 3257:One possibility, I think, would be to 772:member thinks conservatism is and why 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 5081:Mass killings under Communist regimes 5079:Liberalism banner to the article for 4352:RfC that members may be interested in 7: 868:It is the last question on the FAQ. 5455:Political Parties and Party Systems 3630:eager for your coordinator to cast? 3625:So even though WPCouncil says "The 333:now refurbished for visitors etc.) 209:Conservative Party (Czech Republic) 5164:Conservative Party of Saskatchewan 4124:'s removal of the responding IP's 3867:"Obviously the coordinator should 1094:Presented only to bridge the gap. 265:they are no longer Thatcherite. -- 24: 5630:more than enough for this project 4993:all fundamentalist religions. 3146:My attention has been drawn to a 3093:Self-described as "conservative", 1685:RGloucester, that's pretty good. 430:unless proven otherwise (ie. the 235:Website of the Conservative Party 3873:Again I should be more direct. 3871:be a controversial character. "' 3607:be a controversial character. -- 29: 3268:managing project collaborations 673:radically reshape and/or delete 393:Responding to perceived threats 5624:inclusion. I seem to remember 2901:American Conservative movement 2777:American Conservative movement 2730:American Conservative movement 2687:09:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 110:How many of these can we find 1: 5967:20:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 5950:22:05, 28 December 2011 (UTC) 5931:23:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC) 5912:23:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC) 5646:17:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5471:16:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5445:As your source says, it is a 5441:15:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5414:15:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5296:23:47, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5275:23:33, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5260:23:12, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5245:21:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5220:15:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5199:06:33, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5180:05:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5144:05:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5107:05:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5088:04:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5074:04:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5050:03:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5025:04:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 5007:04:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 4961:04:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 4948:04:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 4925:01:36, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 4909:01:06, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 4891:01:17, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 4869:01:07, 30 November 2011 (UTC) 4839:23:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4807:23:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4784:22:34, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4693:07:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC) 4673:00:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC) 4653:23:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC) 4634:23:50, 26 December 2011 (UTC) 4611:22:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4585:21:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4565:10:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4545:08:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4526:08:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4511:05:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4491:02:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4472:01:49, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4455:01:23, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4429:00:54, 29 November 2011 (UTC) 4409:21:36, 28 November 2011 (UTC) 4368:20:34, 29 December 2011 (UTC) 4332:04:34, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 4314:02:52, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 4295:00:09, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 4279:01:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC) 4262:22:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC) 4238:21:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC) 4206:20:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC) 4184:19:23, 29 December 2011 (UTC) 4155:19:20, 29 December 2011 (UTC) 4108:22:53, 28 December 2011 (UTC) 4078:21:52, 26 December 2011 (UTC) 4057:13:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC) 4036:08:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC) 4016:12:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 3968:08:04, 23 December 2011 (UTC) 3950:16:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 3277:archiving discussions etc etc 3238:04:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 3216:02:04, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 3197:02:01, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 3173:03:11, 20 December 2011 (UTC) 3162:19:06, 18 December 2011 (UTC) 3137:00:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC) 3051:00:37, 16 December 2011 (UTC) 3033:00:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC) 3017:00:09, 16 December 2011 (UTC) 2984:23:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2948:23:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2877:23:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2848:16:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2824:23:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2802:15:41, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2746:11:02, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2718:23:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2670:09:43, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2651:09:35, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2629:07:30, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2611:07:25, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2595:09:30, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2575:07:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2541:06:28, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2503:06:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2483:06:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2460:06:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2395:05:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2301:02:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2196:01:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2118:01:37, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2039:01:14, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 2020:01:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 1989:00:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 1941:00:53, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 1922:00:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 1904:00:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 1834:22:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1787:22:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1738:18:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1695:17:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1655:16:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1617:15:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1574:15:32, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1552:08:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1530:07:32, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1509:07:14, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1493:06:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1467:08:30, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1427:07:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1414:07:09, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1400:06:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1391:06:26, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1372:05:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1345:03:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1322:22:08, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 1304:21:37, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 1270:21:34, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 1247:20:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 1222:19:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 1189:07:35, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1165:05:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1143:00:03, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 1119:19:34, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 1078:23:50, 18 December 2011 (UTC) 1047:09:50, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 1017:00:34, 15 December 2011 (UTC) 999:02:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 980:02:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 964:01:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 946:00:30, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 927:00:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC) 893:19:37, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 864:19:24, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 849:19:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 816:18:37, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 801:17:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 764:11:00, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 738:10:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 717:17:20, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 666:06:13, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 648:00:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 630:00:02, 13 December 2011 (UTC) 608:19:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC) 590:19:07, 12 December 2011 (UTC) 542:07:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC) 517:07:02, 12 December 2011 (UTC) 492:09:14, 12 December 2011 (UTC) 464:02:50, 12 December 2011 (UTC) 416:02:41, 12 December 2011 (UTC) 5891:01:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 5869:19:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 5848:04:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 5826:15:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC) 5790:22:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 5772:05:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 5736:22:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 5718:02:19, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 5691:22:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 5664:19:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC) 5597:15:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC) 5554:03:03, 4 December 2011 (UTC) 5523:23:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 5506:22:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC) 5486:18:31, 1 December 2011 (UTC) 5381:18:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC) 5325:17:42, 1 December 2011 (UTC) 5311:16:14, 1 December 2011 (UTC) 5168:Conservative Party of Canada 4986:00:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC) 3935:23:24, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 3891:02:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 3848:22:03, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3833:15:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3800:15:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3785:15:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3764:14:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3723:02:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 3703:14:43, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3679:14:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3652:WikiProject Military History 3637:10:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3621:09:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3590:08:46, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3424:05:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3402:05:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3383:04:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3351:05:21, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3312:09:03, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 3301:03:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC) 2968:There should be no opposing. 385:06:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC) 367:01:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC) 297:06:35, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 279:06:07, 7 December 2011 (UTC) 223:06:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC) 202:03:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC) 169:12:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC) 150:05:59, 3 December 2011 (UTC) 135:03:33, 3 December 2011 (UTC) 5529:Let me quote Farmer again. 3709:Or someone is nominated. -- 3333:. Project coordinators are 350:(from the official website 5983: 5670: 561:removed from this project. 336:Political slogans used by 5759:that they wish to support 5566:double-barreled questions 4356:On the Fox News article. 1376:Toa says that "we do not 4576:with at least one source 4437:In a discussion above, 5761: 5459:British National Party 4663:) I'm glad it's gone. 3627:primary responsibility 3433:primary responsibility 5419:in Hanspeter Kriesi, 5363:NYY, you should read 5206:This is definitely a 1355:category:conservatism 1337:American conservatism 1332:category:conservatism 971:The FAQ is fine, and 42:of past discussions. 4499:Swiss People's Party 4001:break up the project 675:this project to fit 5447:right-wing populist 5160:Swiss Peoples Party 3857:WikiProject Council 3597:WikiProject Council 3461:Second contributor 3142:Rick Perry "Strong" 327:Temple of Confucius 5743:From the guideline 5656:DonaldRichardSands 5515:DonaldRichardSands 5453:from Alan Ware's 4825:over the limit? 4817:Above, you wrote: 3855:When I quoted the 3792:DonaldRichardSands 3777:DonaldRichardSands 194:DonaldRichardSands 127:DonaldRichardSands 5942:RightCowLeftCoast 4379:talk:Ku Klux Klan 4009:delete this group 3918: 3904:comment added by 3739:on his argument. 3595:This is from the 3582: 3581: 2299: 1736: 1550: 1491: 1465: 1268: 1163: 1117: 750:above? Thanks. -- 688:project? It does 628: 540: 428:assume good faith 414: 259:Liberal Democrats 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 5974: 5927: 5922: 5887: 5882: 5844: 5839: 5821: 5814: 5807: 5786: 5781: 5732: 5727: 5715: 5687: 5682: 5592: 5585: 5578: 5550: 5545: 5502: 5497: 5292: 5287: 5241: 5236: 5195: 5190: 5103: 5098: 5070: 5065: 5021: 5016: 5003: 4998: 4982: 4977: 4944: 4939: 4887: 4882: 4865: 4860: 4835: 4830: 4780: 4775: 4689: 4684: 4649: 4644: 4607: 4602: 4561: 4556: 4487: 4482: 4451: 4446: 4425: 4420: 4405: 4400: 4390:Roaring Twenties 4179: 4172: 4165: 4104: 4099: 4032: 4027: 3964: 3959: 3947: 3917: 3898: 3887: 3882: 3828: 3759: 3752: 3745: 3719: 3714: 3674: 3667: 3660: 3617: 3612: 3455:Top contributor 3449: 3420: 3415: 3378: 3371: 3364: 3347: 3342: 3297: 3292: 3234: 3229: 3212: 3207: 3193: 3188: 3179:Time to archive? 3159: 3148:very rough draft 3047: 3042: 3030: 3012: 3005: 2998: 2980: 2975: 2943: 2936: 2929: 2872: 2865: 2858: 2844: 2839: 2820: 2815: 2742: 2737: 2713: 2706: 2699: 2683: 2666: 2661: 2647: 2642: 2625: 2620: 2591: 2586: 2571: 2566: 2537: 2532: 2499: 2494: 2479: 2474: 2391: 2386: 2291: 2114: 2109: 2016: 2011: 1918: 1913: 1899: 1892: 1885: 1783: 1778: 1729: 1614: 1542: 1526: 1521: 1483: 1457: 1368: 1363: 1318: 1313: 1299: 1292: 1285: 1260: 1217: 1210: 1203: 1185: 1180: 1155: 1139: 1134: 1109: 1074: 1069: 1043: 1038: 995: 990: 960: 955: 942: 937: 923: 918: 888: 881: 874: 844: 837: 830: 796: 789: 782: 760: 755: 712: 705: 698: 644: 639: 620: 585: 578: 571: 532: 488: 483: 458: 451: 444: 406: 363: 358: 331:Imperial Academy 275: 270: 248:Some policies — 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 5982: 5981: 5977: 5976: 5975: 5973: 5972: 5971: 5925: 5920: 5885: 5880: 5842: 5837: 5819: 5812: 5805: 5784: 5779: 5730: 5725: 5713: 5709: 5685: 5680: 5590: 5583: 5576: 5570:legitimate work 5548: 5543: 5500: 5495: 5290: 5285: 5239: 5234: 5193: 5188: 5101: 5096: 5068: 5063: 5019: 5014: 5001: 4996: 4980: 4975: 4942: 4937: 4885: 4880: 4863: 4858: 4833: 4828: 4778: 4773: 4687: 4682: 4647: 4642: 4605: 4600: 4559: 4554: 4485: 4480: 4449: 4444: 4423: 4418: 4403: 4398: 4375: 4354: 4177: 4170: 4163: 4118: 4102: 4097: 4044: 4030: 4025: 3962: 3957: 3945: 3899: 3885: 3880: 3826: 3757: 3750: 3743: 3717: 3712: 3672: 3665: 3658: 3615: 3610: 3418: 3413: 3376: 3369: 3362: 3345: 3340: 3320: 3295: 3290: 3248: 3232: 3227: 3210: 3205: 3191: 3186: 3181: 3157: 3144: 3045: 3040: 3028: 3010: 3003: 2996: 2978: 2973: 2941: 2934: 2927: 2870: 2863: 2856: 2842: 2837: 2818: 2813: 2740: 2735: 2725:Khrushchev Thaw 2711: 2704: 2697: 2691:Then create one 2681: 2664: 2659: 2645: 2640: 2623: 2618: 2589: 2584: 2569: 2564: 2535: 2530: 2497: 2492: 2477: 2472: 2467:(edit conflict) 2389: 2384: 2112: 2107: 2014: 2009: 1916: 1911: 1897: 1890: 1883: 1877:Strongly Oppose 1781: 1776: 1612: 1524: 1519: 1366: 1361: 1316: 1311: 1297: 1290: 1283: 1274:TFD, we do not 1215: 1208: 1201: 1183: 1178: 1137: 1132: 1092: 1072: 1067: 1062:Lionel declined 1041: 1036: 993: 988: 973:it is consensus 958: 953: 940: 935: 921: 916: 911: 886: 879: 872: 842: 835: 828: 794: 787: 780: 758: 753: 710: 703: 696: 642: 637: 596:silent majority 583: 576: 569: 486: 481: 456: 449: 442: 395: 361: 356: 273: 268: 108: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5980: 5978: 5970: 5969: 5952: 5935: 5934: 5933: 5904:216.114.194.20 5896: 5895: 5894: 5893: 5853: 5852: 5851: 5850: 5829: 5828: 5795: 5794: 5793: 5792: 5763: 5762: 5740: 5739: 5738: 5711: 5696: 5695: 5694: 5693: 5648: 5618: 5617: 5616: 5615: 5614: 5613: 5612: 5611: 5610: 5609: 5608: 5607: 5606: 5605: 5604: 5603: 5602: 5601: 5600: 5599: 5537: 5536: 5535: 5526: 5525: 5400: 5399: 5398: 5397: 5396: 5395: 5394: 5393: 5392: 5391: 5390: 5389: 5388: 5387: 5386: 5385: 5384: 5383: 5344: 5343: 5342: 5341: 5340: 5339: 5338: 5337: 5336: 5335: 5334: 5333: 5332: 5331: 5330: 5329: 5328: 5327: 5247: 5204: 5203: 5202: 5201: 5155: 5154: 5153: 5152: 5151: 5150: 5149: 5148: 5147: 5146: 5118: 5117: 5116: 5115: 5114: 5113: 5112: 5111: 5110: 5109: 5053: 5052: 5038: 5037: 5036: 5035: 5034: 5033: 5032: 5031: 5030: 5029: 5028: 5027: 5009: 4990: 4989: 4988: 4954: 4953: 4952: 4951: 4950: 4896: 4895: 4894: 4893: 4844: 4843: 4842: 4841: 4822: 4815: 4768: 4767: 4760: 4753: 4746: 4739: 4731: 4724: 4716: 4708: 4707: 4706: 4705: 4704: 4703: 4702: 4701: 4700: 4699: 4698: 4697: 4696: 4695: 4624:of Louisiana. 4618: 4617: 4616: 4615: 4614: 4613: 4591: 4548: 4547: 4531: 4530: 4529: 4528: 4494: 4493: 4460: 4459: 4458: 4457: 4432: 4431: 4374: 4371: 4353: 4350: 4349: 4348: 4347: 4346: 4345: 4344: 4343: 4342: 4341: 4340: 4339: 4338: 4337: 4336: 4335: 4334: 4283: 4282: 4281: 4219: 4218: 4217: 4216: 4215: 4214: 4213: 4212: 4117: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4081: 4080: 4066: 4063: 4049:109.68.196.101 4043: 4042:This is insane 4040: 4039: 4038: 3978: 3977: 3976: 3975: 3974: 3973: 3972: 3971: 3920: 3919: 3853: 3852: 3851: 3850: 3805: 3804: 3803: 3802: 3787: 3767: 3766: 3730: 3729: 3728: 3727: 3726: 3725: 3691: 3686: 3685: 3684: 3683: 3682: 3681: 3643: 3642: 3641: 3640: 3580: 3579: 3576: 3573: 3570: 3567: 3561: 3560: 3557: 3554: 3551: 3548: 3542: 3541: 3538: 3535: 3532: 3529: 3523: 3522: 3519: 3516: 3513: 3510: 3504: 3503: 3500: 3497: 3494: 3491: 3485: 3484: 3481: 3478: 3475: 3472: 3466: 3465: 3462: 3459: 3456: 3453: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3426: 3405: 3404: 3388: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3319: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3279: 3278: 3275: 3272: 3269: 3266: 3247: 3244: 3243: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3220:Actually it's 3180: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3143: 3140: 3126: 3125: 3124: 3123: 3122: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3118: 3117: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3105: 3100: 3095: 3076: 3075: 3067: 3066: 3060: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 2964: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2906: 2905: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2881: 2880: 2879: 2831: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2782: 2781: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2759: 2758: 2757: 2756: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2506: 2505: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2444: 2443: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2419: 2418: 2417: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2413: 2412: 2411: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2407: 2406: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2337: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2332: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2319: 2318: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2313: 2312: 2311: 2310: 2309: 2308: 2307: 2306: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2296: 2288: 2244: 2243: 2233: 2232: 2231: 2230: 2229: 2228: 2227: 2226: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2203: 2202: 2201: 2200: 2199: 2198: 2149: 2148: 2141: 2140: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2128: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2070: 2069: 2068: 2067: 2066: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2055: 2004: 2001: 1993: 1992: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1795: 1794: 1793: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1755: 1753: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1741: 1740: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1703: 1702: 1701: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1697: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1593: 1592: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1547: 1539: 1496: 1495: 1488: 1480: 1470: 1469: 1462: 1454: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1265: 1257: 1234: 1233: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1160: 1152: 1145: 1122: 1121: 1114: 1106: 1091: 1090:Scope: Part II 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1029:would like to 1020: 1019: 1002: 1001: 969: 968: 967: 966: 910: 907: 906: 905: 904: 903: 902: 901: 900: 899: 898: 897: 896: 895: 730: 729: 728: 727: 726: 725: 724: 723: 722: 721: 720: 719: 654: 653: 652: 651: 650: 625: 617: 562: 551: 537: 529: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 499: 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 411: 403: 394: 391: 390: 389: 388: 387: 314: 313: 302: 301: 300: 299: 282: 281: 254: 253: 238: 237: 226: 225: 190: 189: 178: 177: 176: 175: 174: 173: 172: 171: 123: 122: 107: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5979: 5968: 5964: 5960: 5956: 5953: 5951: 5947: 5943: 5939: 5936: 5932: 5929: 5928: 5923: 5915: 5914: 5913: 5909: 5905: 5901: 5898: 5897: 5892: 5889: 5888: 5883: 5876: 5872: 5871: 5870: 5866: 5862: 5858: 5855: 5854: 5849: 5846: 5845: 5840: 5833: 5832: 5831: 5830: 5827: 5824: 5823: 5822: 5816: 5815: 5809: 5808: 5800: 5797: 5796: 5791: 5788: 5787: 5782: 5775: 5774: 5773: 5770: 5765: 5764: 5760: 5758: 5757: 5752: 5751: 5744: 5741: 5737: 5734: 5733: 5728: 5721: 5720: 5719: 5716: 5714: 5706: 5701: 5698: 5697: 5692: 5689: 5688: 5683: 5676: 5672: 5667: 5666: 5665: 5661: 5657: 5652: 5649: 5647: 5643: 5639: 5635: 5631: 5627: 5623: 5620: 5619: 5598: 5595: 5594: 5593: 5587: 5586: 5580: 5579: 5571: 5567: 5563: 5559: 5558: 5557: 5556: 5555: 5552: 5551: 5546: 5538: 5534: 5531: 5530: 5528: 5527: 5524: 5520: 5516: 5511: 5510: 5509: 5508: 5507: 5504: 5503: 5498: 5491: 5490: 5489: 5488: 5487: 5483: 5479: 5474: 5473: 5472: 5468: 5464: 5460: 5456: 5452: 5448: 5444: 5443: 5442: 5438: 5434: 5431:(2006) p 15. 5430: 5426: 5425:Globalization 5422: 5417: 5416: 5415: 5411: 5407: 5402: 5401: 5382: 5378: 5374: 5370: 5366: 5362: 5361: 5360: 5359: 5358: 5357: 5356: 5355: 5354: 5353: 5352: 5351: 5350: 5349: 5348: 5347: 5346: 5345: 5326: 5322: 5318: 5314: 5313: 5312: 5308: 5304: 5299: 5298: 5297: 5294: 5293: 5288: 5280: 5279: 5278: 5277: 5276: 5272: 5268: 5263: 5262: 5261: 5257: 5253: 5248: 5246: 5243: 5242: 5237: 5230: 5229: 5228: 5227: 5226: 5225: 5224: 5223: 5222: 5221: 5217: 5213: 5209: 5200: 5197: 5196: 5191: 5183: 5182: 5181: 5177: 5173: 5169: 5165: 5161: 5157: 5156: 5145: 5141: 5137: 5133: 5128: 5127: 5126: 5125: 5124: 5123: 5122: 5121: 5120: 5119: 5108: 5105: 5104: 5099: 5091: 5090: 5089: 5086: 5082: 5077: 5076: 5075: 5072: 5071: 5066: 5059: 5058: 5057: 5056: 5055: 5054: 5051: 5048: 5043: 5040: 5039: 5026: 5023: 5022: 5017: 5010: 5008: 5005: 5004: 4999: 4991: 4987: 4984: 4983: 4978: 4971: 4968: 4967: 4966: 4965: 4964: 4963: 4962: 4959: 4955: 4949: 4946: 4945: 4940: 4932: 4931: 4930: 4929: 4928: 4927: 4926: 4922: 4918: 4914: 4913: 4912: 4911: 4910: 4906: 4902: 4898: 4897: 4892: 4889: 4888: 4883: 4875: 4874: 4873: 4872: 4871: 4870: 4867: 4866: 4861: 4853: 4849: 4840: 4837: 4836: 4831: 4823: 4820: 4816: 4813: 4810: 4809: 4808: 4805: 4801: 4800: 4795: 4794: 4788: 4787: 4786: 4785: 4782: 4781: 4776: 4766: 4764: 4761: 4759: 4757: 4754: 4752: 4750: 4747: 4745: 4743: 4740: 4738: 4736: 4732: 4730: 4728: 4725: 4723: 4721: 4717: 4715: 4713: 4710: 4709: 4694: 4691: 4690: 4685: 4678: 4677: 4676: 4675: 4674: 4670: 4666: 4662: 4658: 4657: 4656: 4655: 4654: 4651: 4650: 4645: 4637: 4636: 4635: 4631: 4627: 4622: 4621: 4620: 4619: 4612: 4609: 4608: 4603: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4587: 4586: 4583: 4578: 4577: 4572: 4571:prove a point 4568: 4567: 4566: 4563: 4562: 4557: 4550: 4549: 4546: 4543: 4539: 4536: 4535: 4534: 4527: 4523: 4519: 4514: 4513: 4512: 4508: 4504: 4500: 4496: 4495: 4492: 4489: 4488: 4483: 4476: 4475: 4474: 4473: 4469: 4465: 4456: 4453: 4452: 4447: 4440: 4436: 4435: 4434: 4433: 4430: 4427: 4426: 4421: 4413: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4407: 4406: 4401: 4394: 4391: 4387: 4383: 4380: 4372: 4370: 4369: 4365: 4361: 4358: 4351: 4333: 4329: 4325: 4321: 4320:jensen's talk 4317: 4316: 4315: 4311: 4307: 4303: 4298: 4297: 4296: 4292: 4288: 4284: 4280: 4276: 4272: 4267: 4266: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4259: 4255: 4251: 4246: 4243:speech). The 4241: 4240: 4239: 4235: 4231: 4227: 4226: 4225: 4224: 4223: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4209: 4208: 4207: 4203: 4199: 4195: 4191: 4187: 4186: 4185: 4182: 4181: 4180: 4174: 4173: 4167: 4166: 4158: 4157: 4156: 4152: 4148: 4144: 4143: 4142: 4140: 4136: 4132: 4127: 4123: 4109: 4106: 4105: 4100: 4093: 4089: 4085: 4084: 4083: 4082: 4079: 4075: 4071: 4067: 4064: 4061: 4060: 4059: 4058: 4054: 4050: 4041: 4037: 4034: 4033: 4028: 4020: 4019: 4018: 4017: 4014: 4010: 4006: 4005:Binksternet's 4002: 3997: 3993: 3990: 3987: 3983: 3969: 3966: 3965: 3960: 3953: 3952: 3951: 3948: 3942: 3938: 3937: 3936: 3932: 3928: 3924: 3923: 3922: 3921: 3915: 3911: 3907: 3903: 3895: 3894: 3893: 3892: 3889: 3888: 3883: 3876: 3872: 3868: 3864: 3863: 3858: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3836: 3835: 3834: 3831: 3829: 3822: 3821: 3816: 3812: 3807: 3806: 3801: 3797: 3793: 3788: 3786: 3782: 3778: 3773: 3769: 3768: 3765: 3762: 3761: 3760: 3754: 3753: 3747: 3746: 3738: 3734: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3724: 3721: 3720: 3715: 3708: 3707: 3706: 3705: 3704: 3700: 3696: 3692: 3688: 3687: 3680: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3669: 3668: 3662: 3661: 3653: 3649: 3648: 3647: 3646: 3645: 3644: 3639: 3638: 3635: 3628: 3624: 3623: 3622: 3619: 3618: 3613: 3606: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3591: 3588: 3577: 3574: 3571: 3568: 3566: 3563: 3562: 3558: 3555: 3552: 3549: 3547: 3544: 3543: 3539: 3536: 3533: 3530: 3528: 3525: 3524: 3520: 3517: 3514: 3511: 3509: 3506: 3505: 3501: 3498: 3495: 3492: 3490: 3487: 3486: 3482: 3479: 3476: 3473: 3471: 3468: 3467: 3463: 3460: 3457: 3454: 3451: 3450: 3447: 3443: 3441: 3438: 3434: 3425: 3422: 3421: 3416: 3409: 3408: 3407: 3406: 3403: 3399: 3395: 3390: 3389: 3384: 3381: 3380: 3379: 3373: 3372: 3366: 3365: 3356: 3352: 3349: 3348: 3343: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3327: 3326: 3325: 3322: 3321: 3317: 3313: 3310: 3305: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3299: 3298: 3293: 3286: 3285: 3276: 3273: 3270: 3267: 3264: 3263: 3262: 3260: 3255: 3253: 3245: 3239: 3236: 3235: 3230: 3223: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3214: 3213: 3208: 3201: 3200: 3199: 3198: 3195: 3194: 3189: 3178: 3174: 3171: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3160: 3154: 3149: 3141: 3139: 3138: 3134: 3130: 3116: 3113: 3109: 3106: 3104: 3101: 3099: 3096: 3094: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3086: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3074: 3073: 3069: 3068: 3065: 3062: 3061: 3052: 3049: 3048: 3043: 3036: 3035: 3034: 3031: 3025: 3020: 3019: 3018: 3015: 3014: 3013: 3007: 3006: 3000: 2999: 2991: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2982: 2981: 2976: 2969: 2965: 2949: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2938: 2937: 2931: 2930: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2904: 2902: 2897: 2896: 2882: 2878: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2867: 2866: 2860: 2859: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2846: 2845: 2840: 2832: 2829: 2825: 2822: 2821: 2816: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2799: 2795: 2790: 2789: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2780: 2778: 2773: 2772: 2747: 2744: 2743: 2738: 2731: 2726: 2721: 2720: 2719: 2716: 2715: 2714: 2708: 2707: 2701: 2700: 2692: 2689: 2688: 2686: 2684: 2677: 2673: 2672: 2671: 2668: 2667: 2662: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2649: 2648: 2643: 2636: 2632: 2631: 2630: 2627: 2626: 2621: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2608: 2604: 2600: 2596: 2593: 2592: 2587: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2573: 2572: 2567: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2542: 2539: 2538: 2533: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2514: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2504: 2501: 2500: 2495: 2488: 2484: 2481: 2480: 2475: 2468: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2457: 2453: 2448: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2442: 2438: 2437: 2396: 2393: 2392: 2387: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2377: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2362: 2361: 2360: 2359: 2358: 2357: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2352: 2351: 2350: 2349: 2348: 2347: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2342: 2341: 2302: 2298: 2297: 2294: 2290: 2289: 2286: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2267: 2266: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2249: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2242: 2240: 2235: 2234: 2197: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2151: 2150: 2147: 2143: 2142: 2119: 2116: 2115: 2110: 2102: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2092: 2091: 2090: 2089: 2088: 2087: 2086: 2085: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2081: 2080: 2079: 2054: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2036: 2032: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2018: 2017: 2012: 2005: 2002: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1991: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1978: 1974: 1973: 1942: 1938: 1934: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1920: 1919: 1914: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1894: 1893: 1887: 1886: 1878: 1875: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1835: 1831: 1827: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1788: 1785: 1784: 1779: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1739: 1735: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1696: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1638: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1618: 1615: 1609: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1591: 1587: 1586: 1575: 1571: 1567: 1562: 1557: 1556: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1549: 1548: 1545: 1541: 1540: 1537: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1528: 1527: 1522: 1515: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1497: 1494: 1490: 1489: 1486: 1482: 1481: 1478: 1475: 1472: 1471: 1468: 1464: 1463: 1460: 1456: 1455: 1452: 1448: 1428: 1425: 1421: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1398: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1388: 1384: 1379: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1370: 1369: 1364: 1356: 1352: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1343: 1338: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1324: 1323: 1320: 1319: 1314: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1302: 1301: 1300: 1294: 1293: 1287: 1286: 1277: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1267: 1266: 1263: 1259: 1258: 1255: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1244: 1240: 1236: 1235: 1232: 1229: 1228: 1223: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1212: 1211: 1205: 1204: 1196: 1190: 1187: 1186: 1181: 1174: 1173: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1162: 1161: 1158: 1154: 1153: 1150: 1146: 1144: 1141: 1140: 1135: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1120: 1116: 1115: 1112: 1108: 1107: 1104: 1101: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1089: 1079: 1076: 1075: 1070: 1063: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1053: 1048: 1045: 1044: 1039: 1032: 1028: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1007: 1004: 1003: 1000: 997: 996: 991: 984: 983: 982: 981: 978: 974: 965: 962: 961: 956: 949: 948: 947: 944: 943: 938: 931: 930: 929: 928: 925: 924: 919: 908: 894: 891: 890: 889: 883: 882: 876: 875: 867: 866: 865: 861: 857: 852: 851: 850: 847: 846: 845: 839: 838: 832: 831: 823: 819: 818: 817: 813: 809: 804: 803: 802: 799: 798: 797: 791: 790: 784: 783: 775: 771: 767: 766: 765: 762: 761: 756: 749: 745: 742: 741: 740: 739: 736: 718: 715: 714: 713: 707: 706: 700: 699: 691: 687: 682: 678: 674: 669: 668: 667: 663: 659: 655: 649: 646: 645: 640: 633: 632: 631: 627: 626: 623: 619: 618: 615: 611: 610: 609: 605: 601: 597: 593: 592: 591: 588: 587: 586: 580: 579: 573: 572: 563: 560: 556: 552: 549: 545: 544: 543: 539: 538: 535: 531: 530: 527: 522: 521: 520: 519: 518: 514: 510: 505: 493: 490: 489: 484: 477: 476:Toa Nidhiki05 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 465: 462: 460: 459: 453: 452: 446: 445: 436: 435: 433: 429: 425: 420: 419: 418: 417: 413: 412: 409: 405: 404: 401: 392: 386: 382: 378: 374: 370: 369: 368: 365: 364: 359: 352: 349: 346: 345: 344: 342: 339: 334: 332: 328: 324: 320: 312: 309: 308: 307: 306: 298: 294: 290: 286: 285: 284: 283: 280: 277: 276: 271: 264: 263:David Cameron 260: 256: 255: 251: 247: 246: 245: 243: 236: 233: 232: 231: 230: 224: 220: 216: 213: 210: 206: 205: 204: 203: 199: 195: 188: 185: 184: 183: 182: 170: 166: 162: 157: 156: 155: 154: 153: 152: 151: 147: 143: 139: 138: 137: 136: 132: 128: 121: 118: 117: 116: 115: 111: 105: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 5954: 5937: 5918: 5899: 5878: 5875:Ku Klux Klan 5856: 5835: 5818: 5811: 5804: 5802: 5798: 5777: 5755: 5754: 5749: 5748: 5746: 5742: 5723: 5710: 5704: 5699: 5678: 5650: 5629: 5625: 5621: 5589: 5582: 5575: 5573: 5569: 5561: 5541: 5532: 5493: 5454: 5451:this extract 5428: 5424: 5420: 5283: 5232: 5205: 5186: 5131: 5094: 5061: 5041: 5012: 4994: 4973: 4935: 4878: 4856: 4851: 4848:encyclopedia 4847: 4845: 4826: 4818: 4798: 4797: 4792: 4791: 4771: 4769: 4762: 4755: 4748: 4741: 4733: 4726: 4718: 4711: 4680: 4660: 4640: 4598: 4594: 4575: 4574: 4552: 4537: 4532: 4478: 4461: 4442: 4416: 4396: 4385: 4376: 4373:Ku Klux Klan 4355: 4301: 4248: 4193: 4189: 4176: 4169: 4162: 4160: 4122:user:Rjensen 4119: 4095: 4091: 4045: 4023: 3988: 3979: 3955: 3900:— Preceding 3878: 3870: 3866: 3861: 3860: 3854: 3823: 3819: 3771: 3756: 3749: 3742: 3740: 3737:IDON'TLIKEIT 3710: 3671: 3664: 3657: 3655: 3631: 3626: 3608: 3604: 3600: 3583: 3444: 3436: 3432: 3430: 3411: 3375: 3368: 3361: 3359: 3338: 3335:facilitators 3330: 3288: 3282: 3280: 3258: 3256: 3251: 3249: 3225: 3203: 3184: 3182: 3145: 3127: 3114: 3107: 3102: 3097: 3092: 3087: 3071: 3070: 3063: 3038: 3009: 3002: 2995: 2993: 2989: 2971: 2967: 2940: 2933: 2926: 2924: 2898: 2869: 2862: 2855: 2853: 2835: 2811: 2774: 2733: 2710: 2703: 2696: 2694: 2690: 2679: 2657: 2638: 2616: 2582: 2562: 2528: 2524: 2490: 2470: 2466: 2439: 2382: 2293: 2287:Buster Seven 2285: 2239:conservatism 2236: 2144: 2105: 2078: 2077: 2051: 2007: 1979: 1975: 1909: 1896: 1889: 1882: 1880: 1876: 1774: 1754: 1588: 1564:curtailed... 1559: 1544: 1538:Buster Seven 1536: 1517: 1513: 1485: 1479:Buster Seven 1477: 1473: 1459: 1453:Buster Seven 1451: 1419: 1377: 1359: 1351:conservatism 1336: 1328:conservatism 1309: 1296: 1289: 1282: 1280: 1275: 1262: 1256:Buster Seven 1254: 1230: 1214: 1207: 1200: 1198: 1176: 1170: 1157: 1151:Buster Seven 1149: 1130: 1111: 1105:Buster Seven 1103: 1098: 1093: 1065: 1034: 1030: 1025:I wonder if 986: 972: 970: 951: 933: 914: 912: 885: 878: 871: 869: 841: 834: 827: 825: 821: 793: 786: 779: 777: 773: 769: 751: 731: 709: 702: 695: 693: 689: 685: 680: 676: 672: 635: 622: 616:Buster Seven 614: 582: 575: 568: 566: 558: 554: 547: 534: 528:Buster Seven 526: 479: 455: 448: 441: 439: 423: 408: 402:Buster Seven 400: 396: 354: 347: 335: 319:Confucianism 315: 304: 303: 266: 249: 239: 228: 227: 191: 180: 179: 124: 113: 112: 109: 78: 43: 37: 5921:Will Beback 5881:Will Beback 5838:Will Beback 5780:Will Beback 5756:any article 5750:any article 5726:Will Beback 5681:Will Beback 5544:Will Beback 5496:Will Beback 5317:Binksternet 5303:NYyankees51 5286:Will Beback 5267:NYyankees51 5252:Binksternet 5235:Will Beback 5212:NYyankees51 5189:Will Beback 5136:Binksternet 5097:Will Beback 5064:Will Beback 5015:Will Beback 4997:Will Beback 4938:Will Beback 4901:Binksternet 4881:Will Beback 4829:Will Beback 4774:Will Beback 4683:Will Beback 4643:Will Beback 4601:Will Beback 4555:Will Beback 4481:Will Beback 4445:Will Beback 4399:Will Beback 4287:Binksternet 4007:attempt to 3982:RGloucester 3772:An example: 3695:Binksternet 3556:Guerillero 3518:BelloWello 3394:Binksternet 3222:MiszaBot II 3206:Will Beback 3129:RGloucester 2838:Will Beback 2794:RGloucester 2736:Will Beback 2660:Will Beback 2619:Will Beback 2615:Why not? 2565:Will Beback 2493:Will Beback 2188:RGloucester 2108:Will Beback 2031:RGloucester 2010:Will Beback 1981:RGloucester 1933:RGloucester 1912:Will Beback 1777:Will Beback 1687:Binksternet 1566:RGloucester 1312:Will Beback 989:Will Beback 936:Will Beback 600:Binksternet 161:RGloucester 36:This is an 5959:Writegeist 5861:Malke 2010 5166:, not the 4360:SeanNovack 4324:Writegeist 4271:Writegeist 4230:Writegeist 4135:Writegeist 3941:Guerillero 3927:Writegeist 3840:Malke 2010 3480:NYYankees 3440:Power play 3318:Discussion 3252:procedural 3153:Guerillero 3024:Guerillero 1608:Guerillero 1514:Once again 679:wants and 98:Archive 10 5634:Roscelese 5562:let it go 3022:movement- 2635:territory 2525:typically 1420:at Klein. 1353:article, 909:FAQ issue 432:duck test 371:See also 338:Hu Jintao 323:Confucius 90:Archive 7 85:Archive 6 79:Archive 5 73:Archive 4 68:Archive 3 60:Archive 1 5712:Kenatipo 5675:Bourbons 5642:contribs 5208:WP:POINT 5132:de facto 4812:WP:POINT 4796:why are 4735:leaders. 4250:editing. 4126:comments 3992:contribs 3914:contribs 3902:unsigned 3865:I wrote 3575:Avazina 3569:Lionelt 3550:Lionelt 3531:Lionelt 3512:Lionelt 3493:Lionelt 3474:Lionelt 3442:, Klein? 2519:OK, but 559:de facto 555:de facto 261:. Under 252:etc etc. 5955:Support 5813:Nidhiki 5626:someone 5622:Support 5584:Nidhiki 5478:Rjensen 5433:Rjensen 4917:Rjensen 4665:Rjensen 4626:Rjensen 4518:Rjensen 4306:Rjensen 4254:Rjensen 4247:rule = 4198:Rjensen 4171:Nidhiki 3946:My Talk 3751:Nidhiki 3666:Nidhiki 3537:JohnCD 3370:Nidhiki 3158:My Talk 3029:My Talk 3004:Nidhiki 2935:Nidhiki 2864:Nidhiki 2705:Nidhiki 1891:Nidhiki 1613:My Talk 1291:Nidhiki 1209:Nidhiki 1031:propose 880:Nidhiki 836:Nidhiki 788:Nidhiki 704:Nidhiki 690:nothing 577:Nidhiki 450:Nidhiki 229:Britain 39:archive 5938:Oppose 5900:Oppose 5857:Oppose 5799:Oppose 5769:Lionel 5700:Oppose 5671:#Scope 5651:Oppose 5560:Will, 5369:WP:NPA 5365:WP:AGF 5085:Anupam 5047:Anupam 5042:Oppose 4970:Lionel 4958:Lionel 4804:Lionel 4582:Lionel 4542:Lionel 4538:Oppose 4464:aprock 4392:, etc. 4245:WP:BLP 4013:Lionel 3875:Lionel 3634:Lionel 3587:Lionel 3464:Edits 3458:Edits 3309:Lionel 3170:Lionel 1424:Lionel 1397:Lionel 1342:Lionel 1100:world. 1027:Lionel 977:Lionel 744:Lionel 735:Lionel 114:France 4976:Klein 4859:Klein 4852:bound 4419:Klein 4098:Klein 4026:Klein 3994:)??? 3970:reply 3958:Klein 3906:Lecen 3881:Klein 3713:Klein 3611:Klein 3499:Jj98 3452:Page 3414:Klein 3341:Klein 3291:Klein 3259:elect 3228:Klein 3187:Klein 3041:Klein 2974:Klein 2814:Klein 2682:Klein 2641:Klein 2585:Klein 2531:Klein 2473:Klein 2385:Klein 1520:Klein 1362:Klein 1179:Klein 1133:Klein 1068:Klein 1037:Klein 954:Klein 917:Klein 754:Klein 733:70.– 681:their 677:their 638:Klein 482:Klein 357:Klein 305:China 269:Klein 181:Czech 16:< 5963:talk 5946:talk 5926:talk 5908:talk 5886:talk 5865:talk 5843:talk 5785:talk 5731:talk 5705:true 5686:talk 5677:. 5660:talk 5638:talk 5549:talk 5519:talk 5501:talk 5482:talk 5467:talk 5437:talk 5410:talk 5377:talk 5367:and 5321:talk 5307:talk 5291:talk 5271:talk 5256:talk 5240:talk 5216:talk 5194:talk 5176:talk 5170:.) 5140:talk 5102:talk 5069:talk 5020:talk 5002:talk 4981:zach 4943:talk 4921:talk 4905:talk 4886:talk 4864:zach 4834:talk 4779:talk 4688:talk 4669:talk 4648:talk 4630:talk 4606:talk 4560:talk 4522:talk 4507:talk 4486:talk 4468:talk 4450:talk 4424:zach 4404:talk 4364:talk 4328:talk 4310:talk 4291:talk 4275:talk 4258:talk 4234:talk 4202:talk 4151:talk 4139:talk 4131:this 4103:zach 4094:? -- 4088:Mzk1 4074:talk 4070:Mzk1 4053:talk 4031:zach 3986:talk 3963:zach 3931:talk 3910:talk 3886:zach 3844:talk 3827:Talk 3796:talk 3781:talk 3718:zach 3699:talk 3616:zach 3419:zach 3398:talk 3346:zach 3337:. -- 3296:zach 3284:here 3233:zach 3211:talk 3192:zach 3133:talk 3046:zach 2979:zach 2843:talk 2819:zach 2798:talk 2741:talk 2665:talk 2646:zach 2624:talk 2607:talk 2590:zach 2570:talk 2536:zach 2498:talk 2478:zach 2456:talk 2390:zach 2295:Talk 2192:talk 2113:talk 2035:talk 2015:talk 1985:talk 1977:to.' 1937:talk 1917:talk 1830:talk 1782:talk 1691:talk 1651:talk 1570:talk 1546:Talk 1525:zach 1505:talk 1487:Talk 1461:Talk 1410:talk 1387:talk 1378:need 1367:zach 1317:talk 1276:need 1264:Talk 1243:talk 1184:zach 1175:. -- 1172:here 1169:See 1159:Talk 1138:zach 1113:Talk 1073:zach 1042:zach 1013:talk 994:talk 959:zach 941:talk 922:zach 860:talk 812:talk 759:zach 686:this 662:talk 643:zach 624:Talk 604:talk 548:they 536:Talk 513:talk 487:zach 410:Talk 381:talk 362:zach 343:). 329:and 293:talk 274:zach 242:here 219:talk 207:The 198:talk 165:talk 146:talk 131:talk 5806:Toa 5577:Toa 5463:TFD 5406:TFD 5373:TFD 5172:TFD 4799:you 4793:you 4503:TFD 4164:Toa 4147:TFD 3869:not 3815:TFA 3811:FAC 3744:Toa 3659:Toa 3605:not 3572:35 3553:60 3534:24 3515:36 3496:27 3477:78 3363:Toa 2997:Toa 2990:any 2928:Toa 2857:Toa 2698:Toa 2676:TFD 2603:TFD 2521:TFD 2452:TFD 1884:Toa 1826:TFD 1727:edg 1647:TFD 1590:to. 1561:to. 1501:TFD 1406:TFD 1383:TFD 1284:Toa 1239:TFD 1202:Toa 1009:TFD 873:Toa 856:TFD 829:Toa 808:TFD 781:Toa 748:TFD 697:Toa 658:TFD 570:Toa 509:TFD 474:Hi 443:Toa 424:but 377:TFD 375:. 289:TFD 215:TFD 142:TFD 5965:) 5948:) 5910:) 5867:) 5820:05 5662:) 5644:) 5640:⋅ 5591:05 5572:. 5521:) 5484:) 5469:) 5439:) 5412:) 5379:) 5323:) 5309:) 5273:) 5258:) 5218:) 5178:) 5142:) 4923:) 4907:) 4855:-- 4671:) 4632:) 4540:– 4524:) 4509:) 4470:) 4415:-- 4366:) 4330:) 4322:. 4312:) 4293:) 4277:) 4260:) 4236:) 4204:) 4178:05 4153:) 4141:) 4076:) 4055:) 3943:| 3933:) 3916:) 3912:• 3846:) 3820:NW 3798:) 3783:) 3758:05 3701:) 3673:05 3599:: 3578:4 3559:1 3540:1 3521:5 3502:2 3483:2 3400:) 3377:05 3155:| 3151:-- 3135:) 3026:| 3011:05 2942:05 2903:." 2871:05 2800:) 2779:." 2712:05 2609:) 2458:) 2194:) 2037:) 1987:) 1939:) 1898:05 1832:) 1693:) 1653:) 1610:| 1572:) 1507:) 1422:– 1412:) 1389:) 1298:05 1245:) 1216:05 1015:) 887:05 862:) 843:05 822:is 814:) 795:05 711:05 664:) 606:) 594:A 584:05 515:) 457:05 383:) 353:-- 295:) 221:) 200:) 167:) 148:) 133:) 94:→ 64:← 5961:( 5944:( 5906:( 5863:( 5658:( 5636:( 5517:( 5480:( 5465:( 5435:( 5408:( 5375:( 5319:( 5305:( 5269:( 5254:( 5214:( 5174:( 5138:( 4919:( 4903:( 4667:( 4628:( 4520:( 4505:( 4466:( 4362:( 4326:( 4308:( 4289:( 4273:( 4256:( 4232:( 4200:( 4149:( 4137:( 4072:( 4051:( 3989:· 3984:( 3929:( 3908:( 3842:( 3830:) 3824:( 3813:/ 3794:( 3779:( 3697:( 3396:( 3131:( 2796:( 2685:] 2605:( 2454:( 2190:( 2033:( 1983:( 1935:( 1828:( 1734:☭ 1731:☺ 1689:( 1649:( 1568:( 1503:( 1408:( 1385:( 1241:( 1011:( 858:( 810:( 774:X 770:X 660:( 602:( 511:( 461:' 379:( 291:( 217:( 196:( 163:( 144:( 129:( 50:.

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

Knowledge (XXG)

talk:WikiProject Conservatism/Archive 5 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index