Talk:Open Europe

message: Seems to be a one sided description of what Open Europe does. Dones't give a neutral description.
: Agree.  Reads like a Party Political Broadcast.  --Red King 22:52, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This organisation is a reputable think-tank (far more so than some of the one-man-and-his-dog outfits which have articles on wiki). See and Stockholm network. So why has it been deleted? If it is NPOV surely it can be edited accordingly? Sceptic 12:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was apparently deleted as re-created text according to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Europe. If you think it should be re-created, bring it up at Wikipedia:Deletion review. There are a few things that should change with the article before re-creating, such as removing all of the external links that are peppered throughout the article—select a few important, relevant ones and put them at the end of the article under sections "External links" and "References", where appropriate; another thing the article needs is references from outside sources, not just publications by the organization. The Guardian link is good, but it looks like it might just be in something like a business directory; events or actions covered by newspapers and magazines would be good. —Centrx→talk • 14:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks. I will look at deletion review page. The Guardian link is a Special Report, not a directory: "In this special report we profile Britain's leading thinktanks and explain what they are up to." . How can I edit the article while it is still deleted? Sceptic 15:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You could copy and revise a draft at User:Sceptic/Open Europe draft; make sure there is a link to it here if you use a different name. —Centrx→talk • 17:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put in a request to undelete it, but don't know how to access the deleted article to edit it. Sceptic 17:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

text: It seems to me that Open Europe is exactly the sort of body that should be listed here given its important role in UK politics. Just look in any newspaper and it is always being quoted. Alexuk 17:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why has this page been deleted again?

message: I have placed a draft re-write at User:Sceptic/Open Europe draft. Any thoughts? Sceptic 18:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: First attempt at a NPOV re-write

message: The result of this AfD discussion was keep.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)   14:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Europe (second nomination)]] 

message: I have added a 'dubious' tag to the claim that Open Europe polling is independent.  When a Telegraph journalist can say  “I hate to say this, because I know and like the Open Europe people, but I think the bulk of their poll is not that useful, because the wording of their questions was not neutral enough.”A strong constitution? : May 2006 : Shane Richmond : Technology : Telegraph Blogs
For example, their question to the Irish voters on a sceond referendum was loaded with a de-facto poll on the Irish Government "would be less likely to vote for Cowen and his party in an Irish general election if he decided to re-run the referendum".  I suspect that the 'no's included many people who couldn't be any less likely to vote for him.  Open Europe must have known this. --Red King (talk) 14:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Independent' polling - dubious 

message: Wikipedia's guidelines for how neutrality can be achieved says that "Historians commonly cite many sources in books because there are and will always be disputes over history. Contributors on Wikipedia can do the same thing, thus giving readers a broad spectrum of POVs and opinions." As this entry cites a large number of sorces, which take a very different view of the organisation, it seems as if the NPOV flag should be removed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SBMoqvist (talk • contribs) 01:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of NPOV 

message: An important part of WP:NPOV policy is avoiding WP:PEACOCK language ("the best of the best of the best", "widely recognized", 'keen', 'ardent', numerous', etc.) The information must speak for itself. 'The bestest' is most often 'an opinion', and as such it must be clearly attributed to the opinion holder and is admitted into a wikipedia article only if the opinion holder is an independent expert on the issue (i.e., "we are the best" is a no-go). In particular, one cannot give a reference to 4-17 publications that mention a fact and then write in wikipedia "it is widely <bla-bla about this fact>". Staszek Lem (talk) 20:27, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:PEACOCK]] 

message: I have changed the Status for Open Europe to "Private company" from the previously listed "Non-profit", as a search of the the Companies House database , and Open Europe's Terms & Conditions page  confirm the organisation is a Private company limited by guarantee without share capital, not a Non-profit. Also the slogan "The Status Quo is Not an Option" under the Open Europe logo was removed - this text is nowhere to be found on the Open Europe website as a slogan for the organisation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eurofederalistlondon (talk • contribs) 16:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal Status and Slogan 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Open Europe. 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.openeurope.org.uk/Page/Supporters/en/LIVE
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 12:58, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified