Talk:Anarchism/Archive 19

message: This is just to inform people that I want Wikipedia to accept a general policy that BC and AD represent a Christian Point of View and should be used only when they are appropriate, that is, in the context of expressing or providing an account of a Christian point of view.  In other contexts, I argue that they violate our NPOV policy and we should use BCE and CE instead. See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/BCE-CE Debate for the detailed proposal. Slrubenstein   |  Talk  22:55, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  For general information: announcing policy proposal 

message: I have put this POV/original research ditty up for deletion. Find the VFD system confusing? Anyone lend a hand? check it out! - max rspct 16:42, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Log/2005_May_20#Anarchism_vs._anarcho-capitalism|VFD- Anarchism vs. anarcho-capitalism]]

message: What's up with all the new user names; who all seem to be trying to make this page "coherent" (that is, coherent with their own ideology)? millerc 15:36, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What's up with all the new users?

message: I put the anarcho-capitalist classics back in.  Please, Tothebarricades.tk, don't delete books simply because authors don't agree with your sect.
:The article isn't about anarcho-capitalism. Besides, an obscure branch of right-libertarianism founded rather recently cannot yet have "classics" on par with things like God and the State and certainly shouldn't be bunched in like that without comment. It's misleading. An observer would be lead to believe that Rothbard is the leading anarchist thinker, when in fact he's not even an anarchist and like eleven people have heard of him. --Tothebarricades.tk 02:19, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
::On the new edit - this may be acceptable, but trim it down. Surely all of those works are not "classics." --Tothebarricades.tk 02:30, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
Rothbard is "Mr. Libertarian," the father of anarcho-capitalism.  (Well, there's Molerini...)  All  the readers of LewRockwell.com and Mieses.org number well over 11.  Fact: Rothbard is a leading anarchist thinker.  That's an objective NPOV evaluation.  So I'm going to add in those anarco-capitalist classics, and add one more classic: Leopold Kohrs' "The Breakdown of Nations."  The NPOV policy requires that both anarcho-socialism and anarcho-capitalism be presented in an unbiased manner.  This means that you should not delete ancap books. --Hogeye 17:13, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classic Books 

message: There's a "Neutrality Disputed" notice at the top of the page, saying to check out the discussion on the talk page.  Where exactly is that discussion?  Should I delete the notice?  The current version looks about as even-handed as it's ever going to get.  --Hogeye 19:56, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality Dispute 

message: I thought the disclaimer was originally added to get anarcho-capitalist crap out of this article? If the AC stuff is still here, what's it for? --Tothebarricades.tk 22:30, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
*It looks to me like it's intended to be a link to non-political meanings of anarchism.  Tothebarricades, would you please write any POV concerns you have in the preceeding topic.  (It sounds like you might have some.) --Hogeye 23:50, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Tothebarricades.tk is right, the disclaimer is meant to show that this article focuses on a meaning of anarchism that editors have been debating over for a long time. Check the archives: a survey taken clearly shows that the article should focus on the anti-capitalist, anti-state anarchism. --albamuth 01:02, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is meant by the italics? 

message: I would like to request comment on my addition of anarcho-capitalism to the controversies section.  Is this minimally acceptable?  Please feel free to revise it in the most NPOV way possible.  Anarcho-capitalism may be a minor movement among Anarchists, but so are many of the other movements listed in the "schools" section.  If you believe it should be removed, please explain why. --Academician 01:51, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Excepting a couple minor changes, this is an acceptable way to present anarcho-capitalism within this article.  That is precisely why the ac partisans will not allow it to stand as is without pushing farther and farther, but it is a good attempt.  Kev 01:55, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved it to the "Schools of Anarchism" section, where it belongs. --Hogeye 02:20, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:   There you have it.  Kev 08:30, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anarcho-capitalism added to "controversies" section