This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
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 Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization 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.
Ramesh Ponnuru (June 12, 2014).
"John Goodman Knows Wehbycare Won't Work".
National Review Online. Retrieved June 12, 2014. This move [of John Goodman leaving the NCPA] was recent enough that both Wikipedia and Forbes still list him as the group's president.
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
I removed the specific mention of 'partial' funding in the lede, as there is a funding section which explicitly states that a minority of the organization's funding comes from industry - which would make this a 'partial' amount of a minor part of the funding. Emphasizing it clearly biases the article. 10:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Fight the bias (
talk •
contribs)
Conservative or not
I also removed the label 'conservative' from the lede, as the organization does not label itself conservative, and there is a section of this article devoted to 'other characterization' (itself suspect) that calls them conservative. Emphasizing this point, along with emphasizing 'health industry funding', is an NPOV violation. 09:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Fight the bias (
talk •
contribs)
The description of the NCPA being a "conservative" think tank comes from the multiple cited
reliable secondary sources. The emphasis on the NCPA being "partially financed by the insurance industry" comes from the multiple cited
reliable secondary sources.
Apatens (
talk) 17:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)reply
I'm still wondering how its POV to identify a group's political orientation. Or where it gets its funding. Seems like the OP is trying to hide something rather than be neutral.
PrBeacon (
talk) 02:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)reply
Not only are there 237 hits on Google News, there are also 243 hits in the New York Times.
If you look at the actual hits, they're important stories. NCPA has been vocal in the health care debate.
For that reason, when people read about them in the newspapers, and search Google to find out more about them, it's useful to have a good Wikipedia article explaining where they're coming from -- and in particular where their money is coming from.
The only important thing is that we can't let the NCPA create their own page, in violation of
WP:COI and
WP:NOTADVERTISING.
Ncpa 2009 should realize that s/he's violating WP rules. If Ncpa 2009 or someone from NCPA under a different name tries to edit it, at best it will simply be reverted, and at worst they'll get some embarrassing negative publicity. --
Nbauman (
talk) 20:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)reply