This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofconservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This page is under thestewardship ofWikiProject Conservatism; changes to it should reflectconsensus. If you are planning to make any significant changes, please discuss them first.
I still do maintain that many of the thinkers currently included arequitemarginal and do not necessarily belong in a global template for conservatismas of now. The best course of actions as it now presents itself to me:
(1) restore the list of intellectuals that I came up with
... while I'd...:
(2) remove my idiosyncratic country labels
(3) restore the original ordering by chronology
At that, however, I'd further suggest picking one major work in the invisible comment respectively and dating them accordingly...
@Trakking, you recently undid my addition of various Islamic theorists.[1] Excluding my very boilerplate literature section for good now, what speaks against including conservative Islam a fair bit more? Sure, it can't just be Islamic theology... and in that case, my lesser-known suggestions easily become notable enough for inclusion.
Hello. I have already added Mishima from Japan. And we have added Qutb as a prominent representative from the Islamic world. If you can find a valuable representative from China, please add him. Now that you’re speaking of it, I just noticed that Shinzo Abe is not included among Politicians. I’m adding him immediately!Trakking (talk)10:07, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done Note that there was a discussion above some years ago about whether this should be added a conservative ideology, but it's now listed under the "related topic" of right-wing politics. I also added it alphabetically to align with the other entries.Thebiguglyalien (talk)07:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now: please establish aconsensus for this alterationbefore using the{{Edit semi-protected}} template. My view is that the list of politicians is already much too long and should be limited to figures who had a significant impact on the development of conservatism as an ideology (such as De Gaulle, Reagan, Thatcher, etc.).Day Creature (talk)05:24, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Read the main article: ”Conservative Christianity should not be mistaken as being necessarily synonymous with the political philosophy of conservatism, nor the Christian right (which is a political movement of Christians who support conservative political ideologies and policies within the realm of secularor non-sectarian politics).”
There’s a difference between Christian conservatism and conservative Christianity, the first one focusing on political issues and the second on religious ones. Of course, there is significiant overlap.Trakking (talk)22:28, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think an article has to be completely synonymous with political philosophy of conservatism in order for it to be included, just related.
I agree with Trakking's initial position.Conservative Christianity is not definitionally related to the political philosophy of conservatism, and is outside the scope of this template. As a base descriptor, "conservative" in this context simply refers to the adherence to traditional interpretations. It is an "aversion to change or innovation." (Oxford dictionary). Someone can be conservative in their application of ketchup to their hot dog, but that does not make them a political conservative as conceived by the likes of Heywood or Kirk, or in keeping with the scope of the template.
This concept is more about a debate in how to interpret and apply historical views to the modern day church than it is about the beliefs or policies implied by those views. Someone can be conservative in their methodology without being a political conservative.
It is conceivable that a person, especially a Catholic, with liberal or progressive political views would identify as conservative in their theological interpretation. Their strict construction of the Bible or the proper style of Mass isn't dispositive of their political beliefs. Likewise, liberal or progressive jurists may still adhere to a textualist or strict construction of the Constitution or statutes.Jcgaylor (talk)00:14, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I came here fromWP:3O and just wanted to inform the editors involved here that I am declining a third opinion request because there are already more than 2 editors involved in the discussion here.Katzrockso (talk)01:34, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Done Note that there was a discussion above some years ago about whether this should be added a conservative ideology, but it's now listed under the "related topic" of right-wing politics. I also added it alphabetically to align with the other entries.Thebiguglyalien (talk)07:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now: please establish aconsensus for this alterationbefore using the
