Talk:Foundation for Rational Economics and Education

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the record[edit]

On February 3, 2008 I bagan an article entitled Foundation for Rational Economics and Education as a stub, and began collecting links and refining the article. After a few minutes, I received a message, which I read. The message said the following:

"A tag has been placed on Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information."
"If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dougie WII (talk) 12:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC) "[reply]

So I proceded to place the required tag at the top of the page. However, the page was already gone. I'd say that deleting an article before it is started is a highly questionable practice. Please revise this practice and advise me once the problem is fixed. JLMadrigal (talk) 13:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then I received the following message:

"Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. nancy (talk) 13:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and I returned to the article page which had the following message:

db-meta|It is a test page (CSD G2).| |notes= Above template detranscluded by User:Jerry

But the article was gone. So I began to restore the article, by bringing it up from "history".

But it was not in history either.

Please restore this article so that I may procede with my edits, and bring it up to Wikipedia standards. JLMadrigal (talk) 13:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Restored. If you don't fix it up quickly, it will probably be deleted again. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Ron Paul[edit]

FREE seems to be almost exclusively a project of Ron Paul, and I can't find any press coverage of the organization independent of Paul. I propose that the information on this page be moved to the appropriate place on the Ron Paul page. Binarybits (talk) 05:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • To Binarybits and DougieWII: FREE has an independent role in having published some of the allegedly controversial newsletters, as well as in its other projects. There was some more previous content here that has been speedy-deleted and which I have requested moved to the history of this page at WP:DRV. Can we hold off on sudden decisions until after we review that please, and incorporate what can be reliably sourced? Thanks! John J. Bulten (talk) 19:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • At present it looks a straightforward merge but we'll see what the history merge brings. BlueValour (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • All I can say is it certainly seems far more logical to merge than to delete this. AltiusBimm (talk) 11:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The website[edit]

The link goes to 'something else' (which I cannot read), and a websearch reveals nothing. Jackiespeel (talk) 10:41, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anton Shekhovtsov blog[edit]

A personal WP:BLOGS (Shekhovtsov, Anton. "Pro-Russian network behind the anti-Ukrainian defamation campaign".) was recently added. It does not look like an acceptable source, especially since the article involves a living person. I removed it. – S. Rich (talk) 16:08, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this further, I think Shekovtsov can qualify as a scholar for East European matters, but this article is about a US institution. Moreover, the particular blog – as applied to this article – does not discuss FREE. Shekhovtsov talks Ukrainian matters and brings up people that have been associated both with FREE and the (defunct?) British Helsinki Human Rights Group (BHHRG). He does say the Ron Paul website is "full of misleading articles on Euromaidan" (a search of the site came up with 9 hits), and he cites another article (not about Euromaidan) in particular: a video interview by Mark Almond. So, is he criticizing FREE? No. He is going after a "pro-Russian network", casting a wide net, and catching FREE & BHHRG people in his blog. He does not directly and explicitly criticize FREE. In this regard, because WP:CONTEXTMATTERS, this blog is not acceptable RS. – S. Rich (talk) 17:50, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Institute for Peace and Prosperity: Neocon Watch[edit]

“…All the real experts knew it was going to be a great and easy victory that would remake the Middle East into a paradise of democracy and tolerance. It wouldn't cost a penny, they assured us, because a grateful Iraqi population would be more than happy to re-pay the US for their liberation.

As Iraq burns, the neocons are still claiming to be "experts." They are still demanding that we listen to their brilliant analysis and advice…” Let Ron Paul Help You Fight Back Against Neocons on Iraq

Would not this make a helpful sub-section? 78.147.81.207 (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing Facts Around The Policy: Is the US Government Manipulating Social Media?[edit]

Given the twisted English in this title (if it is a title; the presence of this italicised line is entirely unexplained in the entry), we should delete it as detrimental to Wikipedia's encyclopedic tone. (The quotation stands on its own; WP policy is to leave titles in the reference section, with a hyperlinked footnote number that allows readers to mouse-over for this information.) Either way, this quotation needs to be referenced in-line. I've held off doing this myself because I'm unfamiliar with the topic, but editors better-qualified to untangle this should fix it. Laodah 18:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:58, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Foundation for Rational Economics and Education. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:05, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Foundation_for_Rational_Economics_and_Education&oldid=1202113643"