Talk:Andrew Moravcsik
 | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
editThe second half of this article really reads like a vanity page. AcceptThisNameUser:AcceptThisName
- To which part are you referring: the entirety of the "Education and career" section or the "Scholarly publications" subsection? Also, in what way does it read like a vanity page? If it's because it lists several of his accomplishments, that's essentially because most biographical information about Mr. Moravcsik focuses on his academic and political career. Any suggestions on how to improve the article would be appreciated. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 17:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Black Falcon. I was referring mainly to the "scholarly publications" subsection, specifically "The book, which has been called "the most important work in the field" of modern European studies...". There have also been many critical voices of his theories and that book from scholars in the field. It seemed a one sided promotion of his work instead of just citing the facts. The phrasing of the citations listing reads as promotion to me as well, but it has some legitimacy since it's counts of citations. Hope this helps explain my view. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AcceptThisName (talk • contribs).
- I see what you mean. I'll see if I can dig up additional scholarly reviews of the book (or of his academic publications more generally) today and tomorrow and will modify the article accordingly. It's important to establish the notability of the article's subject, but it's even more important to ensure neutrality by giving due weight to all significant competing views. Thanks for your insights. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 17:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Black Falcon. I was referring mainly to the "scholarly publications" subsection, specifically "The book, which has been called "the most important work in the field" of modern European studies...". There have also been many critical voices of his theories and that book from scholars in the field. It seemed a one sided promotion of his work instead of just citing the facts. The phrasing of the citations listing reads as promotion to me as well, but it has some legitimacy since it's counts of citations. Hope this helps explain my view. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AcceptThisName (talk • contribs).
One of the most notable criticism on The Choice for Europe can be found in a 2004 article in the Journal of Cold War Studies . It's called "De Gaulle, Moravcsik, and The Choice for Europe" (Fall 2004, pp. 89-139). The article clearly shows that Moravcsik has put, to say the least, his theory before the facts. Metck 86.80.169.237 (talk) 21:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Andrew Moravcsik. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6857387/site/newsweek/
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17659940/site/newsweek/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)