Talk:American Enterprise Institute
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the American Enterprise Institute article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Article heavily biased and far from neutral
[edit]This article is heavily biased and just looks as if it was written by someone of the AEI. Instead of neutral sources or academic research, it relies extremely on statements of the AEI, and even if neutral sources are used, there are lengthy explanations, why those sources have gotten it wrong. That's not how you write an Wikipedia article. For example just read the paragraph "Energy and environmental policy". It uses sources 61 and 69-78. With the exeption of 73 EVERY SINGLE SOURCE is from the AEI! Are you kidding me? Wikipedia is not external webspace nor a propaganda plattform for the AEI! Then of course it is no wonder that the paragraph argues that the AEI is pro-environmental with a bit shaky position on climate change. This is a complete distortion of reality. Because if you look into academic papers, the AEI is regarded as staunch anti-environmental and one of the leading climate change denial organization, which has launched disinformation campaigns for 2-3 decades now. However, if you only read and cite the AEI publications, then it's impossible to correctly or neutrally describe that organization. So I urge you to correct that, even it that could mean writing that article for new. Because in the present state it is a shame for Wikipedia. You cannot write an article about an neutral or correct article about an highly controversial organization, if you only let them speak for themselves and just copy all their talking points uncritically. There is a reason why Wikipedia articles should rely on neutral secondary sources. Andol (talk) 23:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
- I agree. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:52, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Andol: and @TrangaBellam:, I encourage you to make the changes you believe are necessary. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 06:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
- By all means, please commence trimming the primary and UNDUE content. SPECIFICO talk 11:19, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Andol: wrote "Because if you look into academic papers, the AEI is regarded as staunch anti-environmental and one of the leading climate change denial organization, which has launched disinformation campaigns for 2-3 decades now." It is important that @Andol: edit this article to cite those "academic papers". Thanks for pointing this problem out for the readers. A reason I was looking up the AEI was because I was reading the NYT article "Trump’s Taliban Deal Showed the Folly of Personal Diplomacy", 2021.08.28, by "Ms. Schake, a foreign policy expert who worked for the National Security Council and the State Department during George W. Bush’s administration, is director of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute." So if AEI were a conservative organization, as the title of the author indicated, her article, critical of Trump, would be highly valuable. The Brittanica's article American Enterprise Institute states that AEI "supports limited government, private enterprise, and democratic capitalism", which are conservative goals. Egm4313.s12 (talk) 22:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
- User:SPECIFICO, why not stubify this and start rebuilding with secondary sources? TrangaBellam (talk) 18:02, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- That would be rather draconian. I think it can be improved from what currently exists. SPECIFICO talk 23:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- User:SPECIFICO, why not stubify this and start rebuilding with secondary sources? TrangaBellam (talk) 18:02, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- centre-right lol 2601:285:8280:6EC0:7478:9934:A692:761A (talk) 19:08, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- These problems remain. Will add cleanup templates. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Have made loads of changes today which editors might want to review. Am stopping there, but think it needs more before removing the template. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:45, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class Conservatism articles
- High-importance Conservatism articles
- WikiProject Conservatism articles
- C-Class organization articles
- Mid-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- C-Class American politics articles
- Mid-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- C-Class District of Columbia articles
- Low-importance District of Columbia articles
- WikiProject District of Columbia articles
- C-Class United States presidential elections articles
- Mid-importance United States presidential elections articles
- WikiProject United States presidential elections articles
- WikiProject United States articles