Talk:Regnery Publishing

message: I deleted the part about leftists considering Regnery to be part of a fascist theocratic scheme to take over America, as that's obviously not sourced. BarrettBrown 05:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And now I've deleted it again. BarrettBrown 00:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about phuck off.PeaceandKarats (talk) 14:20, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Rv pov

message: User:DGG "condensed" the article, but I am not sure why the removal of information was helpful. I am partially reverting/rewording that deletion for now, but I hope DGG will consider explaining his rational for information that seems to be notable (i.e. the involvement of notable individuals in the company). DickClarkMises 19:53, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletions

message: The article includes the quote: "... manages to connect the president to everything from 1997's Oklahoma City bombing to Arkansas's drug underworld to the mysterious death of White House aide and longtime Clinton friend Vince Foster, and, of course, to Paula Jones." However no source is given and we are not told who said it. Can this information be added? Thanks. Steve Dufour 17:28, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The material is sourced, it's been sourced for a long time.  I find your question puzzling.  Guettarda 17:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't question that what was said about the book is true.  I just think it would be better if the article said who said it.  The footnote led to the Amazon.com page for the book.  I didn't see the quote there but I might have missed it. Steve Dufour 20:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Try "Control-F", it's a good way to find text on a web page (with most browsers).  Guettarda 22:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No longer even links to the Amazon page, just supplies the ISBN. No Google hits for the quote, which is a strange one. Regnery published a book which connected Bill Clinton to Paula Jones? No kidding? Who'da thunk it? Andyvphil (talk) 23:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Source for quote

message: Regenry Publishing is obviously controversial yet this article mentions nothing but praise. For example intelligent design is widely considered pseudoscience and the South was the premier source of racism in America(and still is). I found criticism of them from experts while search online so I will add them to my user pageYou very nice place 05:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering that the publishing house doesn't try to hide their radical neo-conservative christian gun-toting views in any way - and publishes them at any given opportunity, would it be apporpriate to include those same charges as a criticism about their works? Regnery might think those things are great and good but their detractors obviously do not. Critics would obviously accuse them of having a political agenda and lack of impartiality (the upshot of which could be an accusation that some of the books are nothing but propaganda) 195.153.45.54 14:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why no criticism section

message: Some of the edits here are legitimate (the correction about Eagle Publishing and the removal of the list of books), but others are plainly POV-pushing, and violate NPOV and OR by including unsourced opinion and blog opinion.  THF 12:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV and OR tags 

message: I took the above sentence out of the article. First, it needs a citation. Second, if we get a citation, we can evaluate how much prominence to give it, if any. Being critical of wartime actions of the Allies, as some of the books apparently do, does not make one pro-Nazi. Noroton 01:27, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You did a lot of research!  I think that's a good call.  After reading the sentence I looked up the authors of the books and couldn't find anything, then looked up the books and couldn't find any sources for it.  It's an ugly label as you said above and should have really solid sources. --PTR 12:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also think it is a good call. However, if the original point was to show common criticisms of the company then removing it has removed a vital part of the article. Maybe you could have replaced it with information about the publisher having published books critical of the allies. 195.153.45.54 15:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a Criticism & Controversy section in the article.  If there are reliable sources with criticism about them publishing books critical of the allies it should be added.  --PTR 15:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: New York Times reviews of books are available online, I think, so the criticism might be found there. I mention the books critical of the war in the "Henry Regnery Company, 1947-1977" section: Gollancz's book, Utley's book are two, and maybe some of the others mentioned there. I take it the main criticism running through the books was overly harsh bombing campaigns that killed German civilians, allegedly more than necessary, but I'm not sure. The commander of Pearl Harbor on 12/7/41, who was fired and blamed for not preparing the base for attack, published a book with Regnery. I searched for but could not find the book I wanted to use to look into this further. Henry Regnery's own biography is entirely online. Noroton 19:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The book by the Pearl Harbor commander (Admiral Kimmel's Story, Regnery, 1955) is characterized in this article: https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2016-12-0/plenty-blame-go-around  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.178.22 (talk) 12:46, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "All three books have been described as "pro-nazi"." 

message: If you do a search for just the word "Regnary," this article doesn't show, and it ought to.  Perhaps someone could do a redirect?  I myself don't know how.  CC.
:I've done it. Gamaliel (talk) 21:36, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Is the intent to set up a redirect for every concievable misspelling of the company's name?  That seems odd to me. 70.109.61.103 (talk) 06:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article doesn't answer to "Regnary" search

message: The image :Image:Unfit for Command.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Unfit for Command.jpg

message: I just finished reading a book they published and noticed their logo.  Is that the Porta Negra?  70.109.61.103 (talk) 06:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo 

message: If there is any way to do so that both sides accept as NPOV, the article ought to mention Regnery's publication of books associated with Rev. Moon's Unification Church: To Bigotry, No Sanction: Reverend Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church by Mose Durst, Inquisition: The Persecution and Prosecution of the Reverend Sun Myung Moon by Carlton Sherwood, and Icons of Evolution and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design both by Jonathan Wells, a Unificationist theologian. 207.68.243.40 (talk) 03:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The best way to handle something like that would be to summarize a dsignificant point of view that's been expressed in a reliable source. So if some newspaper or magazine has discussed these books then we could use that as a source.   Will Beback  talk   21:11, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unification Church association 

message: The American Prospect did critcize the Publishing Co. and a criticism section is only fair, the NYT has one as does every Liberal point of view.99.13.118.232 (talk) 23:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: the american prospect

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Regnery Publishing. 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/20071201044256/http://www.conservativeclassics.com/books/Dissidentbk/book3.pdf to http://www.conservativeclassics.com/books/Dissidentbk/book3.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:43, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think this book deserves a mention in the history section among the best known conservative books published by Henry Regnery.  Regnery published the American edition of the English translation of art historian Hans Sedlmayr's controversial work, Verlust der Mitte, in 1958, as may be verified by searching the Library if Congress catalog.  The Austrian Sedlmayr's connections with Nazism and his Catholicism are well documented; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Sedlmayr .  The book deals (disapprovingly or provocatively, depending on one's taste) with the 19th-century origins of Modern art.  Regnery appears only rarely to have published books on art, being perhaps motivated in each case by their author's political position.  The only other clear example I can find in the Library of Congress of a Regnery art title from the 1950s is Picasso and the Bull, by Vincente Marrero (American edition in English by Regnery, 1956).  The Spanish author is described here as a "traditionalist": https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicente_Marrero_Su%C3%A1rez ; cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalism_(Spain) .  The Library of Congress also, however, holds Henri Gheon's Mary, Mother of God (posthumous American edition in English by Regnery, 1955), which appears to deal largely with imagery and might therefore be considered to be an art book.  Gheon is described here as a Catholic writer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Gh%C3%A9on  Together these three books (all translations into English representing conservative European viewpoints) demonstrate Regnery's Cold War-era involvement in what in the late 20th century came to be called the Culture Wars (mentioned prominently in the quotation from Nicholas Confessore that is currently incorporated into this article).  The facts of their publication may also shed light on Henry Regnery's personal interest in art, evident in his membership in the Cliff Dweller's club of Chicago; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cliff_Dwellers_Club  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.178.22 (talk) 12:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sedlmayr's Art in Crisis (1958) 

message: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/01/18/politics/josh-hawley-book-regnery-simon--schuster/index.html?__twitter_impression=true
Suggest dedicated paragraph as to the significance. Wikipietime (talk) 04:59, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Josh Hawley