Talk:Daniel W. Drezner

Ethnicity United States?

First of all, ethnicity may not be emphasized. Plus I have never heard of United States ethnicity. Thus it will be removed.-- And Rew 04:39, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup tag

I couldn't find the "this reads like a resume and not an encyclopedia article" tag and so used the cleanup template instead. DreamGuy (talk) 22:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

In 2005, the University of Chicago denied Drezner tenure...

This statement has been inserted at least twice, without evidence. I have removed it as, if untrue, it distorts the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heenan73 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Political views?

You need to do more than repeat what he says about his political views. The article needs hard information on his political positions. As with many Wikipedia articles, this one is rendered essentially useless by its failure to provide substantial information on the subject's political orientation. ---Dagme (talk) 16:28, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I would take them out but I have already tagged the article for notability, so that wouldn't look right.BigJim707 (talk) 19:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

This edit states that this page it's been written from Daniel Drezner. I invite the author of this edit to argument what he says, so that the community could review this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogoorcs (talk • contribs) 04:36, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Daniel W. Drezner. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070826143543/http://www.foreignaffairs.org:80/author/daniel-w-drezner/index.html to http://www.foreignaffairs.org/author/daniel-w-drezner/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 09:51, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Notability

What is the point of the notability tag, he clearly passes Wikipedia:Notability (academics) criteria 1 and 7 and possibly others? Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:01, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

• I removed the absurd tag. Reviews in major newspapers of his 2014 book would suffice to establish his notability, even if he was known for nothing else. User:BigJim707 has been around long enough that he should know that a list of books put out by major publishers, and an appointment at a major University make notability probable enough that no editor should slap a tag on the page without at least running a search.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:56, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry if I offended anyone. I probably acted too quickly putting on the tag. In my edit summary I said the article does not seem to assert his notability. I'm not saying he's not notable but perhaps the intro could be, well, a little more assertive. BigJim707 (talk) 21:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

I would like to help, seriously. Could someone give me a few hints as to what is important about him? I am not being sarcastic. I could dedicate a few hours to adding to the article.BigJim707 (talk) 16:19, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

• Two of the three items in the political views section are cherry picked from his own blog. No reason to think they are typical or that other people think they are important. I will take them out, probably, after I put some other stuff in. BigJim707 (talk) 16:32, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Secondary sources in references are all dead links. Going to Google Books. BigJim707 (talk) 16:38, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

I checked the links sourced in the political views section. They are all working fine.

Daniel W. Drezner is a political writer, it is legitimate to state his political views and give some idea of his politics in the article. 14:35, 10 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.156.170.193 (talk)

• I added a review of his most recent book. I will look for more and if I get a few that will give an overview of his political views, I hope.BigJim707 (talk) 16:16, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Finished. I added material from published reviews of his 3 most recent books. I couldn't find any for his two earlier ones. I also removed the political views section. It would be great if someone can find a source saying that he is (it seems) a globalist, neocon or neo-liberal, or whatever he is.BigJim707 (talk) 21:18, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Drezner seems to be coy about his views. The political views section helps to give some idea of his politics. He is aligned with the GOP, supported Iraq war, a conservative etc.175.156.170.193 (talk) 14:39, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Are you implying support for the Iraq war was a conservative policy position? Because it definitely had bipartisan support at the time. 208.127.72.29 (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2023 (UTC)