Jump to content

Talk:Institute of Economic Affairs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Marty jar (talk | contribs) at 22:27, 14 March 2015 (Funding section issues). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

POV

Much of this article - in all sections - is copied verbatim form the IEA's own website, making some parts quite breathtakingly POV. To me, with no specialist knowledge on the topic, this casts doubt on the whole article, the tone of which appears heavily in favour of the organisation. Some examples:

"The IEA achieves its mission by..."
"On the whole, society's problems and challenges are best dealt with by..."
"...government action...should be kept to a minimum"
"The great economist..."
"IEA authors paved the way for the conquering of inflation, the reform of trade unions and the privatisation of the commanding heights of the economy"

Mutt Lunker 10:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take your point, but think you are being over sensitive. Agree that it could be tweaked to be more neutral, but if you read the points you make in context to the rest of the text then it’s not overtly partisan.

Tweak away. Mutt Lunker 22:26, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How's this for starters?

Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA)

The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) was founded in the 1950s by Anthony Fisher out of a fortune made from intensively farmed broiler chickens (Buxted Chickens). An article about this London-based 'think tank' in The Sunday Times states, 'The oldest and biggest daddy of them all, the Institute of Economic Affairs, exists to propagate the ideas of free markets and privatisation. It has been going for nearly 50 years, and advises governments all over the world on ways to denationalise and bring in market systems.' http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Antony_Fisher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.211.130 (talk) 15:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Your text and the Source Watch link don't match though. The text appears to come from GM Watch[1] instead. Both could be added to the External Links section of the article but am not sure that the sites themselves would be regarded as notable or reliable in themselves, although the references they cite ought to be if you can track them down. Mutt Lunker 17:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


To follow the IEA's website in explaining what its mission and standpoint are seems eminently sensibe. If you want to add material about critics of the IEA maintain that seems fine. But this article explains rather than adopts the IEA's POV, which is clearly attributed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.100.45.250 (talk) 14:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Preceding comment (14:56 on 18 July 2008) was by Qlangley. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qlangley (talk • contribs) 15:00, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

namespam

I have removed the lists of staff, of the academic advisory board, etc. This is not considered encyclopedic content. The place for this is on the institute website, which is present as an appropriate external link. Nprmally we list the head, and past heads, but not others. DGG (talk) 18:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funding

This page tells us lots about who doesn't fund the IEA and nothing about who does. In fact, this page really tells us nothing useful about the organisation at all. Can someone who doesn't work for them come up with anything?155.198.54.172 (talk) 16:28, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares if George asked them for a list of funding sources and they refused, it's irrelevant to the rest of the content. It should be removed as it's simply a promotional link for George and provides no illumination of the subject of the article. Digitalblister (talk) 12:35, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well it shows that the IEA wants to keep its sources of funding secret. 92.20.107.169 (talk) 21:18, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Major POV issues in this section. For example, criticism by a think tank was changed to [a think tank] "funded by the left-wing billionaire George Soros, suggested the IEA was one of the three most discreet think tanks in the UK". The link cited as evidence actually said it was one of the three "least transparent" think tanks - it was even in the headline. The terms used are clearly very different in tone. Donations from anonymous trusts were changed to list all other beneficiaries - which again is highly unusual in wiki, while some criticism was prefaced with "According to the Guardian" and "According to left-wing journalist George Monbiot, it may have received...". Overall it looks to be a POV issue. Wiki exists to accurately report - not to editorialise in ways not reflected by the cited references.Marty jar (talk) 22:26, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sloppy Page

I think this page is very, very sloppy and I'll be cleaning it up over the next few days. If great swathes of text are to copied and pasted from the institute's own website they should be clearly citated and and put in quotation marks.

Are the lists of staff and fellows really necessary? I don't think so.--TamsinSpencer (talk) 16:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Institute_of_Economic_Affairs&oldid=651395411"