Talk:Chronicles (magazine)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Lubinskas

This is almost off-topic, and I don't care either way about the link, but in the comment on the removal - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chronicles_%28magazine%29&diff=67435287&oldid=67369612- what's the basis for calling James Lubinskas a "neocon" (well, actually, this calls him a "necoon", but we all typo now and then)? I know of him mostly for his involvement with U.S. English, not a particularly neocon group, arguably more paleo (more precisely, having done a bit of web searching, he seems to be in with the Occidental Quarterly crowd, who don't call themselves paleo, but everyone else calls them that. Anyway, nothing neoconservative about them.) Or was the remark just offhand and didn't mean much? I'd be interested (and a bit surprised) if he actually has neoconservative ties or views. - Jmabel | Talk 19:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Selected articles

What criteria is being used to compile the list of selected articles? Any? Or is it just some editor picking articles that he likes? If it's the latter then it has no reason to exist. Acceptable criteria would be things like "most cited", "most read", "lead articles by month". -Will Beback · † · 01:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Simple: a list like this needs no criteria, also I'm sure you'll go looking to prove me wrong. By your logic, we'd have to delete every template, external links set, and category as OR as well. I think there are people who want to do that, but I find it unhelpful. Yakuman (数え役満) 01:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, every list needs a criteria, otherwise it's just the POV of the editor who added it. Since you are the editor who added it, please explain why you selected these articles. -Will Beback · † · 01:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

"External Links," "Category," templates don't have specific criteria. You're welcome to your opinion, however. Every article is a list of suppositions about a subject. They need to be cited, but there's no criteria for the compilation. Yakuman (数え役満) 01:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

All of the articles listed are available in "external links" so there's no demonstrated reason to duplicate that content on the page. You've refused to give your rationale for picking these articles. We don't need this POV list of one Wikipedia editor's favorite articles. And "External Links," "Category," and templates do have guidelines. -Will Beback · † · 01:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

"One Wikipedia editor's favorite articles" is a personal attack. I am not active in any political party or public policy organization. Please do not assume that my edits represent an agenda. I am committed to maintaining a neutral point of view in all articles I edit. Yakuman (数え役満) 02:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to delete the list again. If you'd like to add back any individual itmes, then please justify them even as we'd justify adding a template, category, or external link if questioned. -Will Beback · † · 02:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)