Wikipedia

Portal talk:Libertarianism/Archive 1

< Portal talk:Libertarianism
Latest comment: 2 years ago by North8000 in topic Hi
Archive 1

Is this page going to be filled in?

Looks pretty empty and I don't feel like doing it since never go to portals. If not filled in, should it be deleted?? Carol Moore 00:29, 7 September 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

Going to call for speedy deletion if it is not filled in since I don't want to do it and it looks bad to have an empty one. Carol Moore 19:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc {talk}

All subpages

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here are subpages that need to be completed:

Simultaneous movement (talk) 04:06, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hidden subpages

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Click here —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simultaneous movement (talk • contribs) 15:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Explanation of how this works

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

We have it set up to randomly display one of 10 pages, with associated picture, biography, and article. I've tried to group these logically (e.g. Bill Redpath / Cato; Steve Kubby / Cannabis; Susan Hogarth / Mary Ruwart; etc.) The main disadvantage seems to be that when you click "edit," it doesn't edit the actual page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simultaneous movement (talk • contribs) 15:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Delete this page?

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

It was started by a sockpuppet and hasn't had much action otherwise. I'm just not in mood for figuring out how to do it again. CarolMooreDC (talk) 18:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I will take a crack at it. Charles Edward (Talk) 18:13, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Ok. I got it looking halfway respectable. None of the variable are set. If someone gets some time, or if I do, you can use the new subpages to expand the topics and then raise the max count on the component templates. I have hidden the DYK and quote and other components. It will take longer than I have right now to set those up. Charles Edward (Talk) 18:52, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians_by_philosophy

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Do we want, need Libertarian Wikipedians? Note in past people have claimed that that is only a PARTY affiliation which all will agree is bunk. CarolMooreDC (talk) 16:44, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A nomination closely related to this portal is currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_March_11#Libertarian_organisations. Debresser (talk) 22:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit links

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Need help with the edit links. All of the edit links send you to / rather than the page you want to edit. Is this a template thing? Abel (talk) 13:37, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Fixed -- John of Reading (talk) 16:17, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
Many thanks, that was driving me up a wall. Abel (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Bias

Latest comment: 12 years ago15 comments7 people in discussion

This whole "Libertarian" portal only deals with libertarian capitalism, while in fact libertarianism is a mostly socialist thing. It's only in the modern USA is the word libertarianism associated with stupid capitalist ideology. It seems incorrect to make a portal about capitalist 'libertarianism' and call it libertarianism when in fact libertarianism is a socialist ideal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.16.231.69 (talk) 10:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

  • The portal is used by whoever uses it.
  • As explained elsewhere:
Libertarian socialists, including Noam Chomsky and Colin Ward, note that the term libertarianism is considered the world over a synonym for anarchism, the United States being unique in associating it almost exclusively with free market ideology.[1][2][3] Academics and proponents of the latter position, however, note that free market libertarians have been spreading their ideas around the world via think tanks and political parties since the 1970s,[4][5] so that beyond the U.S. libertarianism is indeed often thought to refer to the free market pro-property position.[6][7][8] CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:05, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The free-market capitalist libertarian bias of this portal is beyond shamefully blatant. To the extent of it representing itself with the anarcho-capitalist flag. Sir Richardson (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome to correct it. No one has spent time working on this portal for many months. It is not so much a bias as a lack of being complete. WP:BE BOLD :) —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 16:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Agree with the above criticisms—this portal is a complete joke. Someone with some time should correct the bias here. Chernyi (talk) 14:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't see the info in history on who created it but I believe it was an earlier Sockpuppet of User:Simultaneous Motion who was banned as a multiple sock a few years back. (At the time I wasn't real familiar with sock policy.) As I say in a section above, if it's not going to be used or filled in, it should just be deleted. I'm no sure if deleting Portals is a different process, so feel free to go for it and I'll support you. CarolMooreDC 04:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
A note on the procedure - if anyone wishes to begin a deletion discussion, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion#How to list pages for deletion. You only need to nominate the main portal page, not every sub-page. If you have Twinkle enabled then the various steps are done automatically. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
It is too much work to correct, so censorship is the easy option? This is embarrassing. Abel (talk) 12:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
We're having trouble just keeping the Wikiproject quasi active. But feel free to beef this up. I personally find portals vs projects confusing and somewhat redundant, which is another reason I think it's just best to delete something never even finished. CarolMooreDC 22:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Finished or not, people are looking at it. Abel (talk) 01:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Guess I'll have to go out and recruit a couple hundred libertarian editors! :-) CarolMooreDC 03:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I applaud your positive attitude. Count me as your first recruit. I'm going to guess that Doherty's Radicals for Capitalism is in the right-libertarian tradition. Where should I start, Boaz's Libertarian Reader? Abel (talk) 12:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I guess you mean you want to start learning about libertarianism? The Libertarianism article has been substantially rewritten since I last looked, so read it and see what readings appeal to you; lots of online links no doubt easy to explore. Doherty is a good historical overview of pro-market libertarianism. Boaz a little dry. Rothbard's For a new liberty remains a mind expanding classic as does David Friedman's Machinery of Freedom. After reading the radical alternatives, it gives you a better perspective on the more moderate ones and helps you find your place.
Note that "Right-libertarianism" is taken as an insult by a lot of pro-market libertarians (though how left libertarians would survive without a market heaven only knows!!) I think I have to add a few more refs to that effect to the article. Especially because since 9/11 some of the so-called "right" ones have become pro-war monsters (though they call it defense of course). And those like me who don't obsess about whether people are capitalists or communists as long as they don't use the state to force it on others just get fed up with the left right continuum. (And don't get me started on my views of the sexual-economic dynamic behind the obsession: males who want money to get good women vs. males who are afraid males with money will steal their women.)
I myself am a libertarian decentralist and one of these days I'll write that article. CarolMooreDC 20:45, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

The Libertarianism Portal section has a rather broad definition of libertarianism that seems to cover all the 50 or so versions of libertarianism. It is likely that my lack of familiarity, or the fact that the many versions of libertarianism do not yet have standard definitions, that this broad definition of libertarianism is not broad enough. Abel (talk) 20:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

It is also possible that the people claiming bias are thinking about, without actually saying, that the selected articles and selected biographies are too heavily weighted toward the anarchist factions. If that is the case, I completely agree. I suspect that this is likely due to the fact that the anarchist articles that relate to libertarianism are far more numerous and of much higher quality rather than from bias. If someone could point me to some high quality articles, I would be happy to add to the selected articles and selected biographies to better balance out the portal. Abel (talk) 20:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ The Week Online Interviews Chomsky, Z Magazine, February, 23 2002.
  2. ^ Colin Ward, Anarchism: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2004, p. 62.
  3. ^ Fernandez, Frank. Cuban Anarchism. The History of a Movement, Sharp Press, 2001, p. 9.
  4. ^ Steven Teles and Daniel A. Kenney, “Spreading the Word: The diffusion of American Conservativsm in Europe and beyond,” in Growing apart?: America and Europe in the twenty-first century by Sven Steinmo, Cambridge University Press, p. 136-169, 2008, ISBN 0521879310, 9780521879316
  5. ^ Anthony Gregory, Real World Politics and Radical Libertarianism, LewRockwell.com, April 24, 2007.
  6. ^ Carl H. Botan, Vincent Hazleton, Public relations theory II, p. 262, 2006 ISBN 0805833854, 9780805833850
  7. ^ David Boaz, Preface for the Japanese Edition of Libertarianism: A Primer, reprinted at Cato.org, November 21, 1998.
  8. ^ Radicals for Capitalism (Book Review), New York Post, February 4, 2007.

Possible image changes

Latest comment: 10 years ago11 comments5 people in discussion

There was some discussion atLibertarianism about changing the "coin" image in the icon and the banner image at this portal. It was hatted out as not relevant to that page. Perhaps we should have the discussion here. North8000 (talk) 16:19, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Prior discussion from Talk:Libertarianism starts here:

This is really not okay.

  1. It's US-centric
  2. It carries overtones of exclusively capitalist ideology, if not implied goldbuggery, which describes the bulk of libertarian history poorly
  3. It's not very representative of the history or the origins of the term

My suggestion is a crop of Liberty Leading the People.

  1. It's fairly inclusive and shows some effort at NPOV
  2. It's a very iconic painting
  3. It's very appropriate, given that libertarian is a cognate of the French libertaire and all schools of libertarianism have or at least claim Enlightenment roots

I'm very aware that it's a republican symbol, but given that it epitomizes social revolution in rebellion against domination and monarchism, I hardly think many anarchists would find it inappropriate. Finx (talk)

I like your idea and picture, but I can't see where the coin is being used, unless you mean that little icon.....even the coin just looks like a little gold disk at that size and I think the picture that you suggest would look like an ink spot. North8000 (talk) 01:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I do mean the little coin but I think the very random header image on the portal also needs an update. For the tiny one, a cropping and removal of background would make it recognizable, think. Finx (talk) 02:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
The image on the coin is the "Angel of Victory", and therefore not an obvious symbol to use. But I do not see the Liberty painting as a good replacement, although it is better. TFD (talk) 02:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I suppose sabot cat is out? Maybe sabot cat ensnared by an ouroboros-like self-consuming snake on the yellow gadsden flag... with a side of freedom fries? Pretty appropriate way to sum up this clusterfuck, IMO. Finx (talk) 02:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I think that the US coin is a bad idea, but when it's so small that you can't see it it doesn't make much difference. I think that the Statue of Liberty is OK (It's sort of general, and a gift from France) but not US currency. And I think that your proposed picture is really cool. Maybe you can experiment to see if you can crop it (or one like it) and see if it can look like more than an inks spot at that tiny size. Even more perfect (and less likely to gather a few complaints) would be one like that but a bit less risque, if such exists. And that banner picture at the portal looks weird and sort of ugly. The cat is cool! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 03:06, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
I was joking about the cat, because it would have the same NPOV problems as the coin, being a symbol of militant IWW-style unionism and anarchist syndicalism. That said, I'm open to ideas and offer to fix any image up in photoshop if (god willing) we can settle on something inclusive and appropriate. Finx (talk) 03:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
(added later) But it still looks cool!  :-) North8000 (talk) 23:03, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

There's also the Tarantino-esque hands-breaking-chains motif... minus the cowboy on horse, presumably. Finx (talk) 03:29, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't care about getting rid of the gold coin. The current arms-wide image at least gives one a feel for freedom. Not sure if you want to keep the small image of Lady Liberty.
But the painting of liberty holding a French flag?? (Bastian of state socialism that lead attack on Libya?) If she was holding an American flag that would be just as bad.
I like it because it shows the hypocrisy of those who talk liberty (US politicians) while taking it away...
Now my preferred version would be an image of the top of the Declaration of Independence with the following in blow up "government...it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it." and then crop the image there.   Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 23:00, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

What about a red Phrygian cap without rosette with "Liberty" written along its lower edge? Please excuse this example at external commercial link. The cap is an Enlightenment call to Liberty in general and it is in use by the Left and the Right. It is as popular in America as in Europe. It is associated with revolution and reform; anarchism and limited or constrained states. It has no immediate economic association, and so represents neither capitalists nor anti-capitalists. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

 
An unfortunately French associated Phrygian cap lacking a rosette

Footnote error

Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Something is amiss with the display of footnotes on this page; they're over on the right-hand column, slightly overlapping the left-hand column, and the first one isn't numbered. Maybe it's partly hidden under one of the other boxes? Bookgrrl holler/lookee here 19:55, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Edited to add: woah, why are footnotes now displaying here in my comment???? Bookgrrl holler/lookee here 19:56, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

@Bookgrrl: I've fixed the footnotes on this talk page by adding a {{reflist talk}} further up. Without that, the software displays them at the bottom of the page. To fix the portal itself, for now I've added a "References" box, so that the software doesn't display them in a random location in the gaps between the boxes. But it is a common practice for portals to omit the references - see Wikipedia:Portal guidelines#In general - and I think this would be better. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:33, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
@John of Reading: Thanks :)
  Resolved

Lbertolotti (talk) 22:28, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


Featured articles

Good articles

Featured pictures

  •  
    File:Official Portrait of President Reagan 1981.jpg
  •  
    File:Ronald Reagan with cowboy hat 12-0071M edit.jpg

Notice from the Portals WikiProject

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.

As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.

There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   07:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

3rd Parties in the Infoboxq

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Theres an RfC about whether to have 3rd parties candidates in the infobxo editors here. If you have a opinion, please go to [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.207.220.249 (talk) 22:55, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. North8000 (talk) 00:21, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there. Is there a talk page, chat or something for Libertarians here on WP? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piinkkii (talk • contribs) 20:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics/Libertarianism but it's inactive. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 02:22, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal_talk:Libertarianism/Archive_1&oldid=1186738499"