Talk:Bruno Leoni Institute

Italy Low‑importance

	Italy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Libertarianism Low‑importance

	Libertarianism portal Bruno Leoni Institute is within the scope of WikiProject Libertarianism, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Libertarianism and related subjects in the Wikipedia. Template Usage • Change Patrol • Articles Requested • Become a Member • Project Talk LibertarianismWikipedia:WikiProject LibertarianismTemplate:WikiProject LibertarianismLibertarianism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
Edits made by the below users were last checked for neutrality on 31-12-2016 by Example.

Tommaso Alberini (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.
GiovanniCaccavelloIBL (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.

Article has very serious problems edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

(apart from lacking the usual Talk page header material). Specifically:

The article lacks independent, third-party citations for most of its material (i.e., it violates WP:VERIFY), and as of this date, uses bare URLs for citations, which are always threatened by link rot. Moreover, particular sections have further issues including:

violating WP:original research, in analyzing events and primary literature, and presenting editor analysis here (rather than reporting on the published observations and analyses of others);
presenting, in essence, whole sections, that are nothing more than strung together quotations;
doing so, in violation of requirements for the independence of soures, in fully making the description of the organization from its own web pages;
otherwise, depending on too few, and almost no independent (unaffiliated) sources, e.g., where Cato is stated as an affiliate, and therefore not an independent source; and
otherwise failing to comply with the expectation of WP:VERIFY that articles not rely excessively on sources close to the article's subject, leaving the article biased rather than neutral, and essentially unreliable with regard to the accuracy of its description.

In short, an article on an organisation can report what it says about itself, but it can never just report that. This article is, at present, just an extension of the organization's web description of itself, all the worse for not being updated like that self-published material will be. Le Prof 73.211.138.148 (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic