Talk:Shadia Drury

message: There seems to be a rather one-sided, Straussian argument in this article.fledgist 19:25, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: but your comments like "architect of the IRaq catastrophe" sounds really NPOV too. Ha--Mikerussell 03:49, 2005 August 2 (UTC)
This is not an article "about" Shadia Drury but against her, a kind of diffamatory pamphlet that I was surprised to find in place like an encyclopedia! (Franco)
I'm sorry, but I just read an interesting set of review in a Political Science magazine between Steven Smith and her, and I must say that reading this article has made me feel like she is worth nothing. This article is OBVIOUSLY BIASED and making me sick to the stomach that my academic prejudices are being determined by some ill-minded wikipedians who feel it is right to influence people on neutral ground. -n.b.
The article is tagged for weasel words.  Is there anyone who cares to point out which words in this article are considered to be weasel words?  Also, all of you complaining about the neutrality... what *specifically* do you have a problem with? ChrisLawson (talk) 21:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue of Neutrality 

message: I added acknowledgement of her election to the Royal Society of Canada to the first section.
http://www.rsc.ca/index.php?page_id=96&lang_id=1&first_name=&last_name=&academy=&institute_name=University+of+Regina&year_election=&submit=Search&order_by=academy&order_dir=ASC
I'm unsure if "fellowship" is supposed to be capitalised, according to the RSC's regulations, or whether they apply here. --24.57.207.21 00:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, one may want to add FRSC as a postnomial title, but I think this should reflect whether she chooses use it, of which I am unaware. --24.57.207.21 00:54, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada 

message: The section on Struass is a little thin.  We should expand her criticism to actually explain what she find objectionable about the Straussians as opposed to simply acknowledging that they're a "cult" (her words, not mine). Donknotts7878 (talk) 16:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of Leo Strauss 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Shadia Drury. 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/20051027131328/http://globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/377 to http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/377
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) 23:01, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Not just Strauss - she did a hatchet job on Socrates (of all people) as well. She seems to thrive in this niche of outrageous reactionary scholarship, for which fundamentalists christians are always willing to cough up money. The Achilles heel of the right is that the academic quality of the work is invariably piss poor, but hey, it's not like the punters will notice.137.205.101.81 (talk) 09:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Socrates