Any liberally skewed website that fashions itself an encyclopedia by offering definitions made under a “collaborative” effort, that allows “members” to edit content, is uniquely unqualified to define a term like neoconservatism. There is so much conflicting information as to what truly defines neoconservatism that even attempting to define the term (especially from a source like Wikipedia) is nonsensical. From Wikipedia at the top of the page for "neoconservative":
The neutrality of this article is disputed [LOL!]. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (March 2009) This article contains weasel words, vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed. (March 2009)