Talk:Bruno Leoni Institute

Article has very serious problems
(apart from lacking the usual Talk page header material). Specifically:

The article lacks independent, third-party citations for most of its material (i.e., it violates WP:VERIFY), and as of this date, uses bare URLs for citations, which are always threatened by link rot. Moreover, particular sections have further issues including:
 * violating WP:original research, in analyzing events and primary literature, and presenting editor analysis here (rather than reporting on the published observations and analyses of others);
 * presenting, in essence, whole sections, that are nothing more than strung together quotations;
 * doing so, in violation of requirements for the independence of soures, in fully making the description of the organization from its own web pages;
 * otherwise, depending on too few, and almost no independent (unaffiliated) sources, e.g., where Cato is stated as an affiliate, and therefore not an independent source; and
 * otherwise failing to comply with the expectation of WP:VERIFY that articles not rely excessively on sources close to the article's subject, leaving the article biased rather than neutral, and essentially unreliable with regard to the accuracy of its description.

In short, an article on an organisation can report what it says about itself, but it can never just report that. This article is, at present, just an extension of the organization's web description of itself, all the worse for not being updated like that self-published material will be. Le Prof 73.211.138.148 (talk) 00:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)