Talk:The Federalist (website)

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Federalist (website) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 30 days

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 10 November 2013 by reviewer MusikAnimal (talk · contribs).

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 September 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Sean Davis (26 September 2014). "Wikipedia Is Now Trying To Eliminate The Federalist's Online Entry". The Federalist.
Patrick Howley (26 September 2014). "Conservative Website 'The Federalist' Targeted For Wikipedia Deletion After Criticizing Neil deGrasse Tyson". The Daily Caller.
Paul Bedard (26 September 2014). "Wikipedia wants to ban acclaimed conservative site the Federalist". The Washington Examiner.
Napp Nazworth (29 September 2014). "Neil deGrasse Tyson (Sort of) Admits to Misquoting George W. Bush and Agrees to (Someday) Apologize for It". The Christian Post.
Rich Lowry (1 October 2014). "The Cult of Neil deGrasse Tyson". Politico.
Jordan Davidson (16 June 2021). "Wikipedia's Quiet, Big-Tech-Funded Grip On Internet Knowledge Gives It Too Much Power". The Federalist.
Tristan Justice (18 April 2024). "NPR Chief Bragged About Taking Censorship Orders From Feds As Head Of Wikipedia". The Federalist.

COVID 19 "Misinformation" Now Outdated

Hi all,

That the Federalist promoted misinformation is today an extremely bold claim. There's now extensive research from prestigious institutions--from people much smarter than you or me-- suggesting that masks were ineffective; vaccines do not prevent transmission; lockdowns were ineffective. Have a look at the science:

Lockdowns ineffective (Johns Hopkins): https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

Masks ineffective (Oxford): https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/22/opinion/letters/masks-mandates-covid.html

Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission (BMJ and several other prestigious journals):

BMJ: https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o298

CDC: https://www.stardem.com/news/national/cdc-covid-vaccines-won-t-stop-transmission-fully-vaccinated-can-still-get-spread-delta-strain/article_5f83d0cb-8b0a-535d-bbad-3f571754e5ae.html

The Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00768-4/fulltext

We thus must be 100% sure that whatever we label as "false information" not "false" based on pseudoscience and hearsay, but on proof that that information is false. But these studies show that we cannot claim anything that the Federalist wrote is "false." There's plenty of evidence from prestigious journals to suggest that the claims they made and positions they took are true.

If you disagree, you're disagreeing with science; Oxford, Johns Hopkins and other elite institutions; the CDC; and prestigious academic journals. Who is Wikipedia to do that? Thesmallfriendlygiant (talk) 02:59, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Or not Who is Jonas Herby (for example)? Also do these sources talk about social distancing (not lockdowns) or that the death rate had been massaged? Does any of this contradict anything we say was misinformation? Slatersteven (talk) 16:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the more obvious problems with your proposal, opinion columns are marked "opinion" for a reason. XeCyranium (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

excellent! When will the article be corrected? 99.120.234.214 (talk) 19:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I clicked the first link and it is "Applied Economics". Why would anybody publish a paper about a medical question in a journal that has no expertise on medicine? Solution: Exactly because it does not have any expertise on it and will not notice the rookie mistakes. And economists have been lying about COVID since March 2020 because the attitude needed during a pandemic is that people do not behave like egoist sociopath assholes - which would contradict economist dogma.

No need to look further into this when the first link is irrelevant crap already. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]