Talk:Government Accountability Institute

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Government Accountability Institute article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Organizations Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Government Accountability Institute. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140726213013/http://www.g-a-i.org/mission/ to http://www.g-a-i.org/mission/

When 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).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:11, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kathleen Sebelius

The end of the Activities section states that President Obama's public schedule showed zero one-on-one meetings between Obama and then-[HHS Secretary] Kathleen Sebelius, without providing a hint of why this is an issue. In contrast, the previous paragraph discussed the issue of foreign contributions to a U.S. campaign, pointing out that this would be illegal, so we know why it's an issue. But the paragraph on Secretary Sebelius lacks any such context. Could somebody please explain? —MiguelMunoz (talk) 11:36, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the claim, evidence, and reference given the article was byy Peter Schweizer, thus violating rules about secondary sources. Jgmac1106 (talk) 22:08, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Biased writer

Whomever wrote this article is a biased, leftist with an obvious agenda to sway the public to believe utter nonsense propaganda & to further divide the nation. There WERE no "conspiracy theories" from this group regarding Hillary Clinton, nor Joe Bidden! No conspiracies at all. Only facts & most of the world knows this! 2600:6C5C:6000:39B5:85A4:67C1:E941:B5B0 (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relax. The fact that Wikipedia's 'coverage' of GAI is so transparently aimed at throwing as much dirt on the group as possible actually serves to enhance the group's credibility--Wikipedia has become that ideologically captured. I say this as a retired reference librarian who's always voted left. The ideologically committed will never understand this, alas, but people with a genuine concern for the health of the information commons are no more interested in consuming propaganda that supposedly speaks for their views than against them. 142.112.173.26 (talk) 05:05, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]