Talk:Cato Institute
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cato Institute article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 years |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Benefits
Cato scholars seek to promote a better understanding around the world of the benefits of market‐liberal policies and institutions
They also seek to prevent a better understanding of the drawbacks, but since the sentence is sourced to Cato, it does not mention that. I think the article should be less based on primary sources - it would make it less of of a propaganda tool. --Hob Gadling (talk) 05:55, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
https://www.cato.org/commentary/us-expanding-its-goals-ukraine-thats-dangerous Cato believes in negotiations with Russia. Such negotiations (Normandy Format, Minsk agreements) caused the invasion. Xx236 (talk) 12:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the "International" subsection of the "Cato positions on political issues and policies" section
I have marked this section as being written like an advertisement, since it makes no effort to rework Cato's stated positions in an encyclopedic, neutral way. 64.203.244.11 (talk) 14:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Severe NPOV Problem
There exists no section on criticism, even though many have commented on contributions to climate denialism and smoking lobbying, etc. Onhand I have no specific examples but I’m sure they could be found rather easily. 2600:4041:5804:2500:6056:CFD4:8105:DB7 (talk) 01:36, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- Criticism is good, especially on this anti-science organization, but criticism sections are not. See WP:CSECTION. --Hob Gadling (talk) 07:57, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- C-Class Conservatism articles
- Mid-importance Conservatism articles
- WikiProject Conservatism articles
- C-Class organization articles
- Low-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
- C-Class District of Columbia articles
- Mid-importance District of Columbia articles
- WikiProject District of Columbia articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- C-Class politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- C-Class American politics articles
- High-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- C-Class Libertarianism articles
- High-importance Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Politics articles