Talk:Social policies of Phyllis Schlafly

Broken links
Almost all of the shortened footnotes in this article are broken. I would recommend either:
 * 1) Use sfn and the templates from the cite family, because these create reliable links.
 * 2) Remove the links and wikicite from the article. Links are not really necessary if you can't maintain them.
 * 3) Go through the article and figure out why each of the links doesn't work. Maybe there's a pattern.

If there is no one interested in maintaining this article, I will do one of the first two things eventually. CharlesGillingham (talk) 07:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Intro Makes No Sense
"It has been said that Phyllis Schlafly's social policies are a response to feminism." -- is as bizarre an article intro as I've seen. The follow up paragraph provides the proper set up for this article, citing feminism as well. If no one objects, I will be deleting that intro shortly. 10stone5 (talk) 03:16, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe the intro could be written better, but Schlafly's views and teh movement they represent are a response to feminism, advocating a rollback of women's rights. It's kind of weird that a conservative woman be publically speaking out on the idea that women should not be listened to, but that is what it is. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually she seems to oppose feminism because she wants to preserve privileges women already have, not because she doesn't think women should be listened to. That would be an odd statement coming from her indeed, considering she is a woman. Privileges like not being drafted. Equality under the law would mean women would be put on the drafting line.
 * Yes, the intro is weak. “It has been said” is a poor start (passive voice) that refers to a vague group of commentators. Why not a stronger lead that sums up the article: “Phyllis Schlafy’s social policies are rooted in her opposition to the Women's liberation movement.” Jason from nyc (talk) 02:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Deletion
Are Schlarfly's social policies so significant that they require an article of their own? Why can't they form part of her main biographical page? It's not as if she's a significant law maker. I suggest we think about deleting this article and transferring the content. Contaldo80 (talk) 10:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Amen. Sd31263 (talk) 09:27, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Albert Einstein's political views which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:29, 13 March 2014 (UTC)