This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Victor Davis Hanson article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Victor Davis Hanson received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
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 B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Could Victor Davis Hanson be described as a neoconservative? GCarty 13:11, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
No ongoing discussion. Unprotecting. -- Tony Sidaway| Talk 23:51, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
There is too much on this page regarding Hansons political views and his stance towards recent events. More attention should be paid to his role as a scholar, particularly the publishing of The Western Way of War which was revolutionary in the study of ancient Greek warfare. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.234.142.73 ( talk • contribs) 19:15, 17 July 2005 UTC
Valid opposing viewpoints of Hanson based on facts should not be censored and deleted. This censorship is a gross perversion of the spirit of Wikipedia! Valid cites have been made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.248.123.78 ( talk • contribs) 04:28, 25 August 2005 UTC
The image was removed and deleted at the request of Craig M. Eisenberg, who owns the copyright and did not give permission for its use. Please don't upload images you don't personally own. -- Tony Sidaway Talk 16:50, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Deleting line about criticism of VDH's lack of military service. This appears to be based on an ad hominem attack. Only substantive criticism of VDH's scholarly work (or political opinions) is appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.212.153.241 ( talk • contribs) 18:00, 7 November 2005 UTC
It is not an ad hominem attack. It is the accurate statement of a fact which may or may not reflect hypocrisy in his support of the Iraq War —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.229.205 ( talk • contribs) 03:39, 28 December 2005 UTC
To you the statement reeks of political slant because you are embarrassed by it and want to sweep it under the rug. Many of us with family nmembers on the ground in Iraq find it significant. He is free to express his view of the Iraq War and we are free to decide what weight to give that opinion in light of his family staying out of that war. The fact that World War II was obviously an essential and well fought war is exactly what distinguishes it from the current war, along with the fact that it was waged against nations who had already declared war on us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.171.224.83 ( talk • contribs) 01:31 29 December 2005 UTC
"...extreme rhetoric of the antiwar Left... antiwar = anti-Semitism... "lunatic Left"... "fundamentalists and censors"... "half-truths, spin, and conspiracy theories"..."
It's just hillarious -- he's like that the whole way through, with hate speech in every word. But the reason I mention it here was that he didn't rebut " Gary Brecher", he merely launched a bad (ad-hominem we call it?) counterattack, drawing peoples' attention to all the things about Brecher that he thinks are bad (e.g cheering for 9/11)
So it's a bit oddd to list that article as a reply or rebuttal, when it' just a load of personal attacks. "yeah, well anyone who criticizes me is a loony, nyeh!!!" Ojw 13:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
I've removed the text about VDH's 26Aug2005 NRO essay from the Brecher link, and inserted a mention of Brecher in the description of that NRO essay. Now the essay is only mentioned once; much better. For more detail, see my talk page. — Chris Chittleborough 15:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
I've edited the Iraq War section:
I've also edited the intro para to say what kind of grapes he grows. We farm kids care about such details ;-)
As always, feel free to WP:BOLDly improve my work!
— Chris Chittleborough 04:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Hanson is very clear about his notions that non-Western societies value "freedom" and other values less than Western society does. Culture and Carnage in particular pursues that theme. I can't grant your second point. Tom 129.93.17.202 18:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
We seem to be having an "edit kerfuffle" over two external links. (It does not rise to the level of an edit war, IMO.) I thought I'd try to start a discussion of them here. Cheers, CWC (talk) 03:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Two essays about George Washington, one by Richard Brookhiser, the other by Bruce S. Thornton and VDH, from 1999.
"Military Technology and American Culture", an essay for the first issue of The New Altantis, published Spring 2003.
The article from The New Atlantis can't go here as User:CNicol is affiliated with the magazine, making her addition linkspam. As for the other, I don't think we need to link to VDH's individual articles. Wikipedia is not a link directory. CRCulver 10:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
I've just edited the lede to say that VDH is a former classics professor, as explained just a few paragraphs below.
Here's the resulting lede, with added color:
I think the text in red are superfluous and should be deleted. What do other editors think? Cheers, CWC (talk) 01:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
He also disagrees with environmental explanations, as put forth by authors such as Jared Diamond in Guns, Germs and Steel.
I don't want to step into 'Original Research' territory, but I wonder where this has come from? Did VDH himself explicitly criticise Diamond's idea? Or is it an assumption by whoever wrote that?
The reason I mention it is that - if my understanding is correct - Diamond's view is not necessarily in conflict with VDH. In Guns, Germs and Steel, Diamond acknowledges that cultural differences can have an impact on the relative development of different societies. But he argues that this doesn't explain how different peoples came to have different cultures in the first place. So he's talking about influences further back than VDH. You could reconcile the two views, I think, unless VDH has actually said somewhere that he doesn't agree with Diamond. I didn't see a reference for that. -- DudeGalea 21:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Unless this person usually goes by or is referred to as "Victor Davis Hanson" or "VDH", it seems inappropriate to continually use all three names in reference to him in the article. Consider somebody like Lisa Marie Presley, who is frequently referred to by all three names, somebody like Michael Jackson, who is frequently referred to with the surname and first name, and Madonna, who is commonly referred to by only her first name. We don't refer to LMP as "Lisa Marie" or "presley,' nor Lisa Presley. Continuing, we don't refer to Michael Jackson as "Jackson" or "Michael", and certainly not "Michael Joseph Jackson". Lastly, we don't refer to Madonna as "Madonna Ciccone" or "Madonna Louise." I don't think I need to give additional examples (don't get me started on Alexander Siddig). Anyways, I have removed a couple instances where people had used the term "VDH" to refer to him. In American English, it is common to use somebody's last name to refer to them when it is obvious who one is referring to. So in the article, "Hanson" should be fine. I think our readers are smart enough to figure out who the name references. ... aa: talk 22:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
It's clear from Victor Hansons blog entry regarding himself and Mark Steyn, that he is saying that they are the only two left, as in pundits. Mark Steyn is clearly not a NeoConservative and Hanson who had objected to the 1998 letter from the NeoConservatives to president is not one either, as he's said here and elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.97.41.12 ( talk • contribs) 07:47, 17 December 2006 UTC
But the above quotation doesn't make him a neoconservative at all. The "pundit" he cites doesn't call him that, so there's no question of his contracting or not contradicting it. The "pundit" says hyperbolically that Steyn and Hanson are "the only two" who support the war and Rumsfeld. The "pundit" doesn't say "the only two neoconservatives", but rather "the only two." Don't assume that "two" means "two neoconservatives" just because the word neoconservatives appears in the previous sentence. After all, the word leftists occurs there too. Tom 129.93.17.139 01:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
(Much later) We now have a clear statement from VDH about this, which I added to the article a few weeks ago:
(The quote also helps people find the relevant section of a long blog post.) Cheers, CWC 16:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The NPOV template strongly suggested there were POV problems with this article, but none were apparent when I read it, so I looked into the article history to see what I could discover about who added it and why.
{{POV|November 2006}} was added over two months ago (11:19, 20 November 2006 UTC) by 71.111.119.60 ( talk) ( contribs), who was blocked the next day for vandalism, and blocked again two days after that for evading the block as 71.111.115.155 ( talk) ( contribs).
Judging the encyclopedic health of the article to be good, and the source of the tag to be spurious (in the extreme ;-D), I have removed it. — Athænara ✉ 00:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I see nothing POV in this article; in fact, it seems to be good-but-not-great as far as Wikipedia articles go. Responding to User:Lexo: the article supplies enough context, and carries several (mostly silly) criticisms in the External links section. Remember: at Wikipedia, we need WP:Reliable Sources for negative claims in a WP:BLP. I've removed the POV tag, and made some other improvements. Cheers, CWC 12:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
He has a good point. I've been writing papers on the Peloponesian Wars and the Anabasis, and nearly every book and scholarly article I pick up about it is either by Hanson or else cites Hanson. My flamingly left-wing Ancient Warfare professor requires two of his books (out of eight total assigned texts) for his class.
Hanson is well known as a political commentator. But that's really sort of a sideline; he's a history scholar first and last, and a farmer in the middle. The article should reflect that. 74.177.13.192 ( talk) 23:10, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Picking this up again here again a year after the latest comment. I agree with User:Lexo above. As I look at the current page, I see 21 references but it appears that only 4-5 of them are not written by the man himself; clearly it is inappropriate for our Wikipedia articles to be largely autobiographical (and his own writings might be promotional and WP:NOTRELIABLE). To be slightly more fair, I don't think it promotionalizes the views as much as it is just entirely devoid of any third-party remarks on the views. To those who assert that this article should cover more of his academic background: the burden is to find the sources. Glancing at the literature through GScholar, I found that John Keegan wrote a favorable review in the intro to his book the Western Way of War and that Kirkus Reviews wrote a favorable review listed on the GBooks reviews, although both seem to say his book ran counter to the mainstream. On politics, I noticed " Victor Davis Hanson Goes Berserk" but it seems somewhat self-published. Hard to find a published commentary, which is surprising given his platform and how passionate he appears. II | ( t - c)
The following sentence was added to the article a few weeks ago:
I requested a citation, but none has appeared, so I've moved it here for discussion. Does anyone know of a significant essay by VDH about the Cold War? If so, could you please add something (either here or in the article) with more details? The title of the essay would be a good start ...
Cheers, CWC 16:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Jayjg, you have claimed that the text you removed violated BLP. But everything you removed is cited to RS, and is mostly Victor Hanson (the subject of the article) in his own words, expressing his own point of view. Please attempt to justify your blatantly unjustified reversion, or I will add it back. In particular please specify exactly which portions of the text you deleted you believe to be a violation of BLP, and remove those portions, and only those portions, next time. Cheers, Jgui ( talk) 04:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
In order to ensure that biographical material of living people is always policy-compliant, written neutrally to a high standard, and based on good quality reliable sources, the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete disputed material. Before adding or restoring material, the editor committing the edit must ensure it meets all Wikipedia content policies and guidelines, not just verifiability of sources.
Hi my name is Juanita Diane Hanson I was born in Idaho in 1947 my father was Francis Leroy hanson he was born at Fort Mc Dermott on the 8January 1898 he used many dates for the Army the other dates he uses are * January 1900 or 8 January 1906 he served in the South Pacific. Army serial number is 20955132 his parents were
father : John Gabriel Hanson born 1876 Califorina died in Humbolt Nevada 1920 mother: (Mary) Millicent'Millie Caryle 1800 Quincey Califorina died 1950 Winnemucca my Grand father had two more brothers I thinks one was Chisthoper and the other I am not sure about
if you are my relation my email is hanson j757@gmail.com
Thanks Juanita — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.134.186 ( talk) 00:47, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just attempted to maintain the sources on Victor Davis Hanson. I managed to add archive links to 8 sources, out of the total 8 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead.
Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{
cbignore}}
to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:28, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Victor Davis Hanson. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZWVjYTYwZDZjZTJjNzc5MjViMzQyOWJkZmFiZmMwMjE%3DWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:38, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
On or October 27, 2016, anonymous editor 171.66.114.11 made a series of changes that are either a clever form of vandalism or a display of gross incompetence when he/she added fake references throughout the article in the form of <sup>[nn]</sup>. Maybe they were intended to be links to the actual numbered references as they existed at the time, maybe not, but the result is a gawd-awful mess. The easy way out is to simply delete them, as I have now done, because as soon as a single reference is added or deleted earlier in the article, the static numbers in brackets become meaningless. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum) T @ 00:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Victor Davis Hanson. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/2006/6/2006_6_24.shtmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:05, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Was this written by his or agent? Wikipietime ( talk) 05:18, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
This article has an insane amount of self-sourced text. This needs to be trimmed ASAP. Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 11:46, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
As it stands now, the first paragraph says he is a traditional conservative, then next paragraph jumps ahead in time and says he is a trump guy (not usually what people think of when they hear 'traditional conservative') and then the next paragraph jumps back in time and talks about people describing him as a neoconservative due to his iraq war stuff.
I know this is all RS, and that it's a challenge due to the evolution, as it were, of VD Hanson's political views, but it's a bit of whiplash to to see all these apparently contradictory labels applied so close together.
Is it possible to reorganize in some way? If nothing else, maybe a chronological approach? ie intro, iraq, obama, trump? And maybe de-emphasize the use of all these labels which are so apparently contradictory? Or just say in the intro, "despite branding himself as a traditional conservative, VDH has supported neoconservatives and trump as well" (but in better wikipedia language)
Thanks to all the hardworking editors for keeping these articles going! 131.114.9.81 ( talk) 13:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
@ Snooganssnoogans:, your addition here [ [3]] has been challenged by several IP editors (quite possibly a single person, multiple IPs). Regardless, at this point the edit has clearly been challenged. Based on the single Slate article I would be inclined to say this material is UNDUE. Doing a web search the first page of hits seemed to be largely about Hanson wanting to reopen the economy. This would also follow some of the interviews he has given. His theory that COVID-19 may have been in the US as early as 2019 might be wrong but Slate is probably not the best source for that information especially since the article seems to have a political bone to pick with Hanson. If this is the only article talking about Hanson's COVID-19 views then the material is almost certainly UNDUE for his BLP. Conversely, if a number of sources talk about his views then those sources should be cited to give a balanced view of his COVID-19 statements. Springee ( talk) 03:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Hanson suggested a hypothesis that COVID-19 may have been in California in the fall of 2019 resulting in a level of herd immunity. This hypothesis was suggested to at least partially explain differences in infection rates in cities such as New York City vs Los Angeles. The hypothesis was widely shared but shown to be incorrect via genetic analysis. [1] [2] [3]
Discussion on the Fringe theory noticeboard. [9] Snooganssnoogans ( talk) 15:46, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
While interviewing Lou Dobbs on Cspan's After Words, Hansen said referring to the Covid-19 virus that "There is a consensus that it came out of a lab." Lou Dobbs didn't even agree to this. Please keep this for the record of his beliefs and willingness to lie. [1]
125.25.137.153 ( talk) 10:04, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
I have been looking for info on Hanson's "current wife" to whom he has made reference in his podcasts.
Why is this bio lacking any "Personal Life" section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:30c0:6e50:4068:c8a6:74c7:24ed ( talk • contribs) 10:32, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Vagans2019, please note that you have added new content to the article which has been challenged. It shouldn't be restored until there is a consensus for inclusion [10]. The problem with this is the guilt by association aspect and more critically WEIGHT. I think this is especially true given the American Freedom Alliance appears to be too minor a group to even have a Wiki article. The SLPC is the only source in the article trying to associate Hanson with anti-islam views. It does this by saying he was a keynote speaker for a groupt the SLPC claims is something. That means Hanson is once removed from the group. Second, this is something that happened in 2017. It doesn't appear to have had any staying power thus we have a weight issue. The SLPC is an activist organization so we need to be careful when they are the only source for an entire type of claim in a BLP article. Certainly the SPLC has proven to be biased and less than reliable. If they are the only source then we shouldn't include it. Springee ( talk) 21:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
My addition on August 13, 2022, was removed by Springee with the comment "nothing indicates this article is notable." Victor Davis Hanson wrote that the FBI has "become dangerous to Americans and an existential threat to their democracy and rule of law."
This seems quite "notable" to me. What I added is below -
Hanson wrote an article for the "Daily Signal" Heritage Foundation publication on August 12, 2022, titled, "The FBI Has Become Dangerous to Americans", which states that, "The agency has become dangerous to Americans and an existential threat to their democracy and rule of law." This article was in response to the FBI executing a search warrant at ex-President Donald Trump's Mar Largo Club on August 8, 2022, where the FBI found, "four sets of top-secret documents and seven other sets of classified information." "One set of documents is listed in the FBI receipt as “Various classified TS/SCI documents,” a reference to top secret/sensitive compartmented information, a highly classified category of government secrets."
Jackcrossen (
talk)
17:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
V.D. Hanson and writings for The Epoch Times where i first discovered him, no mention? why ?. 98.22.98.102 ( talk) 23:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
This label intends to paint Hanson as not towing the line or an enemy of the new left. It’s subtle but it’s there and a dangerous trend in labeling the institutions. That he is affiliated with Conservative institutions is enough, new-speak is not needed to signal those who are opposed. There is such a broad misunderstanding of conservatives that such labels intend to imply, “ you know, the extremists”. This is wrong and diminishes Wikipedia. 98.207.223.17 ( talk) 19:27, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Hey everyone, I just made a couple of bold edits taking out the Democratic Criticism section. Knowing what I do about the article subject it could likely be rebuilt, but as it existed, it was basically just a bunch of his opinion columns summarized in less flattering ways. I think we should probably do the same with the "Obama Criticism" section. Perhaps some will disagree with me, but just because an writer or talking head said something does not make it notable. We really should look for some recognition in other reliable sources that people took notice. As ever, happy for others to disagree. Cheers. Dumuzid ( talk) 17:21, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
It is particularly unusual to retire from an academic career at the age of 51. Some background context needs to be added. What happened that precipitated his early retirement from CSU Fresno? Dogru144 ( talk) 04:23, 24 January 2023 (UTC)