Talk:Jacobin (magazine)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jacobin (magazine) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Article policies

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

Archives: 1: 12 months

Magazines Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Socialism Mid‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

Praise and criticism section / Catalyst

This article has had editing disputes before, and it’s starting to feel a bit overbuilt again. In particular, the separate “praise” and “criticism” sections don’t seem necessary. Even if they’re balanced overall, splitting things up that way reads more like a pro/con list than an encyclopedia entry. This is something we explicitly try to avoid, and much of the points are already integrated properly elsewhere in the article

Also worth flagging: the page is getting pretty long, and some trimming or consolidation might help readability. Separate issue, but related: not sure it makes sense to keep Catalyst as a subsection here. Since it’s a distinct journal, it might be cleaner to spin it out into its own page. Happy to discuss that separately. Curious what others think before making any changes. Dsakey1978 (talk) 22:40, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]