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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
Latest comment: 7 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
Hello! As part of my work with Beutler Ink, I've been tasked with preparing suggestions for improving this article on behalf of the Congressional Institute. From my assessment, the article could use an overall clean up—it contains some superfluous details and dated material.
I've drafted a new version that streamlines the content and removes unencyclopedic information. I also added more recent information and sourcing. Editors can view my draft here. You can see how it differs in content from the current article here (note: I had to adjust some of the capitalization and spacing, so the draft looks slightly different now).
I don't think I am suggesting any controversial changes and I've aimed to write a new draft that follows Wikipedia guidelines. However, because of my financial COI, I will not make any edits to the article myself. Instead, I'd appreciate if other editors could review my work and give feedback. If my suggestions look to be an improvement over the current article, I'd love help moving my draft over. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 00:01, 22 April 2017 (UTC)Reply
Update: I will no longer be working on this article. I'd still love for an editor to review my draft, but 16912_Rhiannon (also of Beutler Ink) will be taking over to handle feedback and further messages. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 00:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Per Heatherer's note above, I'll be jumping in here to discuss any feedback on this draft and see if editors would be willing to move it into the live article. As part of my work at Beutler Ink, I'm here on behalf of the firm's client the Congressional Institute. Let me know if there are any questions or edits to the draft. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 18:54, 17 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Srich32977: just giving a little nudge to see if you're still able to take a look at the suggested update for this page. To let you know: I'll be offline next week due to travel, so if you have any questions I might be a little delayed in getting back to you but will be sure to reply as soon as I can. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 20:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Done – S. Rich (talk) 01:46, 30 June 2017 (UTC)