Talk:American nationalism

message: Saying that the US won the the war might give the wrong idea since Canada (and at the time britain) also claim to have won it. Add to that the fact that many historians claim that there were no winner on either side and it might be better to say that the unitedstaters *felt* that they had won the war of 1812.--Marc pasquin 16:58, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: The very existence of this article is a problem, in my view. But if we're going to have this article, it needs to include a lengthy discussion of patriotism. (Indeed, the article on patriotism should be merged into this one, or vice versa.) I think the best solution, though, is to eliminate this article altogether. --Cultural Freedom talk 2006-06-24 10:25 (UTC)
:This, to me, is not an article about patriotism, but about American Nationalism. The 2 are not the same concept. Nationalism is often similar to patriotism but other countries have their own patriots and nationalists so to label an article "patriotism" and talk about the history of American Patriotism would not make sense.--Senor Freebie (talk) 05:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Sure, the US is universally considered a "nation-state" in the commonly-used sense of "modern highly-organized state in the international system", but it's very unusual to consider the country a nation-state in the classical European sense; i.e. a state strongly identified with a particular ethnic group.--Pharos 09:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: no, the USA is certainly not a nation-state; it is about as multi-ethnic and multi-cultural as they come. dab (𒁳) 11:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The "European sense" is not the only possible sense.  The United States is a nation state according to the concept of civic nationalism. 192.104.127.38 (talk) 01:34, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nation-state" status 

message: This article has an astounding lack of sources and references. It also has a POV problem and doesn't separate established fact from theory and opinion. It is just original research. "Words such as "freedom" and "homeland" became commonplace in everyday conversation" , oh brother. Contralya (talk) 10:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a democracy. Please give valid reasons for your thoughts when discussing.--Abusing (talk) 19:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources and POV 

message: The deletion discussion did not reach a consensus, so I removed all NPOV issues and many unverified claims. The article is significantly shorter, and still needs to be rewritten. I have removed the neutrality dispute template. If anyone feels there is still a problem, retag the artical and post your reasons here.--Abusing (talk) 04:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's better... 

message: Do I have the wrong definition of "americentrism" in my head, or is this article totally on the wrong track from the get-go?  I will do some research before I say more.... and I could be wrong in my thinking already..... but I thought "americentrism" was a somewhat negative label, dealing with overzealous national ego, nearsighted world view....that sort of thing.
I'm a citizen of the US myself, so don't hit me if I sound rude!  I AM going to research this subject before I say more.....   itinerant_tuna (talk) 05:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't heard the term Americentrism before, but perhaps an interesting aspect would be any maps which depict the American hemisphere in the center. This is something often done to make a map more familiar, and while its not that common as far as I know in the USA, it is perhaps a reason for a literal meaning of the word Americentrism.--Senor Freebie (talk) 05:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off Its Mark? 

message: Why does that term redirect to an article primarily about how Americans view themselves? We certainly wouldn't redirect anglophile to English nationalism. --MichiganCharms (talk) 09:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The original article for Americophile was nothing but a definition, and was transwikied to the Wiktionary and redirected to United States. It was redirected here two years later (December 2009). I'm surprised the it hasn't been recreated as an independent article since it's initial redirection...uh, anyway, you're completely right and I'll have it redirect back to United States. Swarm(Talk) 05:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For some reason, I didn't fix it after I wrote that comment, but it is now  Swarm(Talk) 04:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Americophile redirect? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on American nationalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/harp/1122.html
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://thomasnastcartoons.com/selected-cartoons/uncle-sams-thanksgiving-dinner-two-coasts-two-perspectives/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:05, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: See AnnaVonReitz.Com
She has clearly defined United States for America Nation, which I do not see in its proper entirety here.
All rights of non-prejudicial truth reserved,
Congregationalist Deacon John  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3BF4:12A0:4C87:3CCD:FB90:BFF0 (talk) 07:08, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  American National Proper Definition Source 

message: The following line is contained in the Trump Presidency section. ″
″During the Trump era, commonly identified American nationalist political commentators include Ann Coulter,[38] Alex Jones,[39] Laura Ingraham,[38] Michael Savage,[40] Tucker Carlson[41] and Mike Cernovich.[42]″
Is Alex Jones actually a political commentator? Surely, he is infamous, but does his name belong next to the others in the list? The cited article doesn't reffer to him as political commentator but a "far-right conspiracy theorist".
 Does the list actually belong in the article at all ?
--2603:3024:1820:500:0:0:0:DFEF (talk) 03:31, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Commentators Under Trump Presidency Section 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pro-American. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  BDD (talk) 20:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pro-American listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The second paragraph of this article is pretty weird. Why is Hans Kohn given the same level of importance as George Washington and the United State Congress? He's just some historian, not the literal founder or main political organ of the nation. See WP:FRINGE.Smefs (talk) 03:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  False equivalence?