Talk:Chronicles (magazine)

message: I have deleted a sentence about Buchanan starting the paleocon magazine The American Conservative, as (1) it is completely irrelevant to this article, (2) he had very little role in starting it, (3) it is not a paleocon magazine.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.30.197.251 (talk) 19:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, actually, it is a paleocon magazine (or at least it was when it came out about five years ago; opinions differ as to whether it has substantively changed since then), and Buchanan had a major role in getting it going, but you are correct that there's very little reason to note any of that in an article about Chronicles. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 14:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Old comments

message: 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)
thread_title: Lubinskas

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: 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)
thread_title:  Selected articles 

message: The term "paleoconservative" used to describe this magazine comes from a book that can be searched on google books.  The term is not anywhere in the book, and the specific page (p 155) as cited, is part of a larger chapter about fascism in Great Britain in the 1930's. An administrator (Will Beback) has restored this citation even though the comment I left the last time I removed the term "paleoconservative" stated this. I'm assuming this was done without him taking the time to verify the citation or lack of. The book is 'Fascism: Critical Concepts in Political Science', Roger Griffin, Taylor & Francis, 2004, p 155, ISBN=0415290201, 9780415290203 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.221.36 (talk • contribs) 
:My apologies for the mistaken citation. I'm not sure how I made that error. Here are a replacement cites: 
:*In the 1990s, Francis maintained a syndicated column in the paleocon Rockford Institute's Chronicles, ...
:*Thomas Fleming, editor of the paleoconservative journal Chronicles...
:*Kirk asked to have his name removed from the masthead of the paleo- conservative Chronicles.
:*
:*Instead, the paleoconservatives' organizational headquarters was the Illinois-based Rockford Institute, publisher of the paleos' monthly magazine Chronicles of Culture.
:Those are ample for the assertion. Please register an account and sign your talk page postings.   Will Beback  talk   17:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paleoconservative 

message: *The magazine is known for promoting anti-globalism and anti-intervention stances within conservative politics,Conservativism, Chronicles and Paleoconservativism, American Conservative Union Foundation. and is characterized as "paleoconservative."http://books.google.com/books?id=31y5P8Lz-S4C&pg=PA219&dq=%22chronicles%22+paleoconservative&lr=http://books.google.com/books?id=98j0s2YVOSkC&pg=PA16&dq=%22chronicles%22+paleoconservative&lr=http://books.google.com/books?id=l5jwgYsemPcC&pg=PA193&dq=%22chronicles%22+paleoconservative&lr=http://books.google.com/books?id=w1bqY-DxHMEC&pg=PA282&dq=%22chronicles%22+paleoconservative&lr= 
Why does this information keep getting removed by an anonymous user? The sources do check out, and so the deletions appear to be vandalism.   Will Beback  talk   16:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see that an editor identifying himself as Scott P. Richert, now executive editor of Chronicles, has appeared on Wikipedia and described the magazine as "one of the two chief paleocon magazines". See Talk:Paleoconservatism/Archive#Sources.   Will Beback  talk   21:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ironically, the latest removal of the references & of the term paleoconservative both removed all the references that showed notability but left a reference that said that Chronicals proclaims itself to be paleoconservative. Dougweller (talk) 10:04, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The IP hopped from Pittsburgh (different IPs all geolocate to Pittsburgh) clearly doesn't care about what the references say, removing the word and leaving edit summaries that show that the references are being ignored. 05:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Paleoconservative 2

message: This article is obviously being hijacked by someone unhappy with Chronicles.
It's true that some people were upset by the Spanish language articles at the Chronicles website, but these articles had nothing to do with immigration nor did they in any way change the tone of Chronicles overall.  To say that "Chronicles has accepted more moderate approaches to Hispanic immigration and diversity" is not only misleading but false.  
Not only does nearly every issue of Chronicles have an article critical of immigration and diversity, but the editors of Chronicles recently published a book, Immigration and the American Future, which is a hard-hitting critique of both illegal and legal immigration.  Furthermore, Peter Brimelow is a regular contributor at Chronicles-related events, such as the John Randolph Club.
I'd recommend until a decent article can be written to have only a stub:  
Chronicles is a U.S. monthly magazine published by the Rockford Institute.  Its full current name is Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture. The magazine is known for promoting anti-globalism and anti-intervention stances within conservative politics, and is considered one of the leading paleoconservative publications.  Its present editor is Thomas Fleming. The executive editor is Scott P. Richert, Aaron D. Wolf is associate editor, and Chilton Williamson is the senior editor for books.
--CM732 (talk) 02:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The article appears to be well sourced, so deleting most of the contents wouldn't be the best solution. The Spanish language articles are mentioned in a neutral fashion, so I don't understand the concern with that. Also, the issues of immigration and diversity aren't even mentioned, though they probably should be. So perhaps the article should be enlarged rather than shortened.   Will Beback  talk   04:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: This article has been hijacked

message: I understand that Srđa Trifković is no longer an editor. But he has been a contributor, right? The archive includes dozens of articles. Just because he's no longer employed by the magazine doesn't mean he was not a contributor in the past.   Will Beback  talk   05:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Srđa Trifković 

message: Alphabetized names of articles and removed controversy section.  I noticed that hardly any other magazines have a controversy section and the Auster "controversy" was so minor it doesn't warrant a section in itself.  --CM732 (talk) 04:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updates 

message: This, besides being unsourced, dwarfs the article and seems clearly there to make the magazine look important. I don't think we have such a section in many of our journal articles, do we? Dougweller (talk) 12:33, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It does seem extraordinary. There is a comparable list in Life (magazine), but that article is much longer.   Will Beback  talk   22:56, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted. Viriditas (talk) 09:34, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable contributors 

message: Hello everybody. The last discussion ended ten years ago about wether there should be a Rockford Institute wiki page or a Chronicles (magazine) page. The R-Institute is now defunct for many years. It seems illogical to report on the - still existing magazine - under the headline of a defunct institute. I therefore propose to open a new page specifically about the magazine.  Pepe1979 (talk) 12:12, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: Currently the Rockford Institute and its successor the Charlemagne Institute, which publishes the magazine, share a page. Llll5032 (talk) 15:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for new discussion