| Revision as of 18:10, 28 September 2021 editEvergreenFir (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators129,255 edits Reverted 1 edit by MoonlightVector (talk): No it's notTags: Twinkle Undo← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 07:13, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,012,002 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2] |
| (75 intermediate revisions by 33 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header|archive_age=14|archive_units=days|archive_bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}} |
|
|
{{controversial}} |
|
{{controversial}} |
|
{{Article history |
|
{{Article history |
| Line 20: |
Line 20: |
|
| topic = socsci |
|
| topic = socsci |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=C|listas=Yiannopoulos, Milo|1= |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography |living=yes |class=C |listas=Yiannopoulos, Milo |a&e-work-group=yes |a&e-priority=low }} |
|
{{WikiProject Biography |a&e-work-group=yes |a&e-priority=low }} |
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism |class=C |importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism |importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|class=C|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject LGBT studies|class=C}} |
|
{{WikiProject LGBT studies}} |
|
{{WikiProject United Kingdom |class=C |importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject United Kingdom |importance=Low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Pedophilia}} |
|
{{WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Kent |importance=Low}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{British English}} |
|
{{British English}} |
| Line 39: |
Line 40: |
|
{{Top 25 report|Jan 29 2017 (5th)|Feb 19 2017 (1st)}} |
|
{{Top 25 report|Jan 29 2017 (5th)|Feb 19 2017 (1st)}} |
|
{{annual readership|scale=log}} |
|
{{annual readership|scale=log}} |
|
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Journalists|class=C}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== why does nothing talk about his computer password == |
|
== Mononym == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was a leak in which he had as his computer password The Night of Long Knives as well as the date the jwews got expelled from England....there is no mention of that in his controversies. ] (]) 18:27, 29 March 2022 (UTC) |
|
As the article currently stands, evidence for Milo as a mononym is lacking. The two cited sources evidence that Yiannopoulos {{em|prefers}} to be called ''Milo'' and was billed as such at a political event. I don't believe that to be sufficient to justify inclusion in the article, let alone the first sentence. Are there reliable sources that exclusively refer to ''Milo'' as some would for Cher or Madonna? Pinging {{u|Superdisk}} as the one who introduced this content. ] (]) 22:34, 24 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Education Infobox== |
|
Thanks for the ping. Milo is referred to simply as Milo on the . His articles on Breitbart (which I can't link to, due to Misplaced Pages's blacklist???????) are attributed simply to "Milo." Here's another article |
|
|
|
He did not graduate from either the University of Manchester or the University of Cambridge, he only attended briefly before being kicked out. His infobox listing these institutions as his 'education' seems in accurate because he did not complete a program of study at either. If you look at Bill Gates' infobox it specifies that he "dropped out" of Harvard, Mark Zuckerberg's does the same - I propose doing similar for Yiannopoulos and noting that he was removed from both.] (]) 16:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC) |
|
] (]) 22:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:I have restored his incomplete education to the infobox. ] (]) 08:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC) |
|
:What we're looking for are reliable, independent sources, which is why his book doesn't apply and Breitbart isn't accepted. The out.com article actually immediately refers to his full name and then later describes him as Yiannopoulos. Is there anything else? ] (]) 22:59, 24 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{re|Superdisk}} Ideally we'd want a source that specifically states that he is commonly referred to mononymously as Milo. The presence of sources that do so may be based on his own preferences, stylistic choices by the news publication, etc. but don't necessarily mean it is a common thing. ] <small>]</small> 23:07, 24 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Milo Yiannopoulos’s charity for white men closes with questions about where the money went == |
|
:{{re|Firefangledfeathers}} {{re|GorillaWarfare}} I'm sure there are other sources, but regardless, he chooses to present his "stage name" as the pseudonym MILO, in the same way Prince or Lorde choose their public name. They didn't earn their mononyms because people started calling them that, they are called that because that's how they choose to be referred to. I think the same applies in this case, but the argument is made stronger due to the sources I linked in which he is known to be booked at venues under the name MILO, and prefers the name. ] (]) 03:39, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{ec}} With Prince and Lorde there are plenty of sources (, ) to verify that they are known mononymously by these names. The same does not appear to be true of Yiannopoulos. People can request to be called all kinds of things, but they are not "known by" a name until it enters common usage. From what I am seeing ('''', ''''), it's verifiable that Milo ''wants'' to be known mononymously, but less so that he actually ''is''. In fact one of the top results for "milo mononym" is an article about that very thing: . ] <small>]</small> 03:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/380821-milo-yiannopoulos-charity-for-white-men-closes-with-questions/ |
|
Ah, . This one's already used as a reference on this very page. I think this ought to serve as a source which confirms his mononym. ] (]) 03:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:Where is that already being used? As for its usability here, it's an opinion piece that makes no statements about him actually being known only as "Milo". See ], also. ] <small>]</small> 04:01, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:It's currently source #77. I'm not sure it's possible to find someone who literally wrote the sentence "Milo Yiannopoulos is known mononymously as MILO" in a research paper or anything-- Although this mention is in a headline, it directly implies that he is known just as "Milo" because it says that he is now called that (as compared to "Milo Yiannopoulos" in the past). Finding a use of the mononym in the wild should count towards him being known as it, surely? ] (]) 04:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::That's weird, for some reason my ctrl-f didn't turn that up. So it is; I'm going to tag it as needing a better source. I'm on the fence about whether that one headline is sufficient. ] <small>]</small> 04:08, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I agree with the better source needed tag; quoting a puffy opinion piece as evidence for his past political party affiliations is very strange. ] (]) 04:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: I must also note that the article itself refers to the name Yiannopoulos only once and then strictly uses the mononym thereafter. ] (]) 04:13, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Even assuming I'm wrong about both of the following counterarguments, this one source is not enough. My issues with this source are that it's an opinion piece and that the author is someone who knows him personally, and therefore might have personal reasons to call him by his first name. ] (]) 04:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::The impossibility of finding that sentence is evidence for us not including "AKA Milo" in the article. Unlike Lorde and Prince, it is not exceedingly easy to find reliable, independent sources that refer to Yiannopolous exclusively, or nearly so, as ''Milo''. I wouldn't object to including a line somewhere about him preferring to be called ''Milo''. But unless there's more out there to cite, we can't use Misplaced Pages's voice to say something that isn't verifiable. ] (]) 04:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: It must be noted that the source linked which supposedly supports Lorde's mononym is the same caliber of article as the Milo one (i.e. a "puffy opinion" piece, and does not outright state that she is known only as Lorde. Colloquial use of a name is inherently going to be a "puffy opinion" thing since he's a public figure. ] (]) 04:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I just picked a source at random out of what came up on Google; this is a discussion about Milo and not about Lorde so I wasn't about to put more than a few seconds of effort into it. Though I would note that I would generally refer to "Lorde" as a stage name rather than a mononym, though it apparently is technically also a mononym. Back to the actual question, I think Firefangledfeathers' suggestion of stating in the article that he wishes to be known mononymously, but excluding the mention from the lead sentence, is a good path forward until better sourcing emerges. ] <small>]</small> 04:31, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: While I'm at it, I'd like to bring up which I think might convince you-- specifically the section <blockquote>His brand is so effective that the mononym “Milo” is virtually at household-levels of recognition</blockquote>The site is aimed at his target audience, although I'm not sure how much more cut and dried it can get than this. ] (]) 04:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::''The Daily Caller'' {{rspe|The Daily Caller}} is unlikely to convince me of anything, and certainly can't be used as a source. The statement is a step in the right direction, though; if you can find an actually reliable source saying it, then I'd be satisfied. ] <small>]</small> 04:39, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::lol beat me to it ] (]) 04:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::The Daily Caller is ]. We should absolutely not rely on it as evidence for factual claims. ] (]) 04:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Due to Milo's transgressive nature, it tends to be the case that the only sites talking about him are "alternative" media sources on the fringe of public acceptability. More to the point, Milo is going to be known by his mononym primarily among his target demographic-- citing a source which targets that same demographic is fair game in this case, IMO, no matter how unreliable the site otherwise is. ] (]) 04:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::There are at least a hundred usable sources in this article already, so it's not the case that "the only sites talking about him are 'alternative' media sources on the fringe of public acceptability". As for ''The Daily Caller'' being fair game, a deprecated source is a deprecated source. ] <small>]</small> 04:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::<blockquote>Milo — he and his acolytes rather ludicrously use the single name —</blockquote><blockquote>That incident, along with his participation in the "Gamergate" disgrace, helped rocket Milo to fame of the single-name status.</blockquote> ] (]) 04:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Would you support a line like this: "Avid supporters of Yiannopoulos may refer to him by his first name." Maybe somewhere near the end of the ''Early and personal life'' section? ] (]) 05:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Note that first source is also an opinion piece. ] <small>]</small> 05:05, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::{{re|Firefangledfeathers}} I'm not sure that such a statement would accurately capture the same meaning as in reality-- Lorde's page, for instance, mentions in the first sentence that she is professionally known as just Lorde. I believe the same to be true of Milo-- he is known professionally by the name (his book, his YouTube channel, and his articles) but also colloquially (the myriad sources I've linked (of which I think the 9news.com.au one most accurately illustrates the point)). I think at minimum it should mention that he is known professionally by the name, but ideally it should mention that it is a mononym. {{re|GorillaWarfare}} True, although the second source I think is the more potent one anyway. ] (]) 05:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::Yes, I do think the second source may be usable. ] <small>]</small> 05:14, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::{{u|Superdisk}}, surely you have to admit that there's a difference between Lorde and Yiannopoulos? I am truly glad that reference how supporters refer to him, but it's clear that the vast majority of reliable sources don't refer to him by a mononym. "Known professionally" requires more than "supporters know him as". ] (]) 05:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::Well, clearly he's not of the same celebrity status as Lorde, but regardless I think most people would agree that Yiannopoulos is who springs to mind when you hear the word "Milo" these days. I think we just brought up Lorde as an off-the-head example of a person with a mononym anyway. Do you have any contention with the second source I linked? ] (]) 05:21, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::I think about the drink! {{pb}}I don't have any contention with the 9 News source, but I still contend that one source is not enough. There's no Policy backing me up on this, but I think it's fair to only say a person is professionally known by a mononym if a solid chunk of the coverage of them refers to them mononymously. ] (]) 05:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::Well, as long as it doesn't break policy, I think it's now fair to add a bit about the mononym. Currently the opening sentence reads <blockquote>Milo Yiannopoulos (/jəˈnɒpələs/; born Milo Hanrahan, 18 October 1984), who has also published as Milo Andreas Wagner, is a</blockquote>I think we could change it to <blockquote>Milo Yiannopoulos (/jəˈnɒpələs/; born Milo Hanrahan, 18 October 1984), who has also published as Milo Andreas Wagner and the mononym MILO, is a</blockquote>What do you think about that? It captures the fact that he is publicly known by the name but doesn't imply anything about the popularity of it (although I personally think that popularity shouldn't matter, I'm willing to make a concession until I find another source). ] (]) 01:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::I notice you keep uppercasing "MILO". Is there any indication it's actually cased that way? ] <small>]</small> 01:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::That's how he stylizes it on , , and the cover of (although this one might just be a stylistic choice). He also owns (owned?) a company called ] (]) 02:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::Well, in absence of any further issues, I'm going to throw it on the page. Revert and let's hash it out some more if there are any qualms. ] (]) 23:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 11:00, 12 July 2022 (UTC) |
|
== I love how “far right” is put right in the first sentence of the article == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Education parameter == |
|
When is this biased website gonna realize that not everyone who isn’t left wing is automatically far right? ] (]) 02:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:When reliable sources describe a person as far-right, , we also describe them as such. ] <small>]</small> 02:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{ping|Cortador}} {{tq| The citation you brought up is for the alma_mater parameter, not the education parameter.}} Hi, no this is wrong. The ] says "This parameter is a more concise alternative to (not addition to) |education= ... It is usually not relevant to include <u>either</u> parameter for non-graduates, but article talk page consensus may conclude otherwise", the either referring to education and alma mater --] (]) 12:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
Ah yes because all those left leaning sources who aren’t biased at all totally prove of him being far right ] (]) 20:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:Please see ] and ]. Feel free to begin a new discussion at ] if you would like to dispute the reliability of any of these sources, the first three of which are ] at RSP, and the fourth which has been repeatedly described as reliable at RSN. ] <small>]</small> 20:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::Since I am feeling accommodating today, I have added two more right-leaning sources for you to verify the "far-right" descriptor: ] <small>]</small> 20:47, 29 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Long quotations of Milo's views == |
|
Wow, putting two articles up and claiming they’re right wing just to own the cons. How very nice of you ] (]) 21:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why would we promote Milo's views in those long quotes, there is no need for more than what first two sentences express. Further, Milo is not "critic of Islam" to be categorized as such - his animus against Muslims expressed in million ways has taken privilege of being called "critic of Islam" from him long time ago. He is a bigot and Islamophobe, and it is unacceptable to put him in the same group as late ], for instance, who genuinely belong to a group of Islam and religion critics with legit arguments. It should be explained why something gets reverted, that's the least we owe to each other. ]] 14:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
Why are you being so defensive Dyldy19 ? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 03:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)</small> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I do think "Critic of" categories are better reserved for those who have an academic/philosophical take on the subject. I agree over-quotation of Milo is a problem. ] (] / ]) 14:48, 30 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
== Milo thinks that dogs stop barking at him is a sign of god == |
|
|
|
::Of course, we should avoid quotations which contain some specific information in vacuum, like those bits I removed but another editor reverted without explanation. When we put something that needs additional elaboration or explanation, all with RS, but don't do that then we promote that info or at least leave reader with a huge question mark over his head; if go into explanation we risk going off topic, and so on. And for label "critic" - it should be reserved, specifically, for genuine critics, not for "pro-trolls". ]] 15:23, 30 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:Feel free to make any ] changes. ] (]) 15:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
::To be fair, Santa was bold and then they were reverted, so this is a good move. ] (] / ]) 16:19, 30 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I later restored my "version", and I hope you guys agree? If some disagree, we can always roll back old version or discuss it more, or bring some new ideas. ]] 17:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
::::It's a good edit. ] (]) 00:55, 31 August 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category was rv again without TP discussion, I assume on the pretense that we have specific guideline or policy which regulates this problem and allow bold and without discussion removal - we don't, because if did we wouldn't have ] filled with BP' and BLP's.--]] 19:05, 1 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
Well, I'm not sure if this is right or wrong but here is the . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== His reversion to catholicism? == |
|
I didn't find the original video so I don't know the context. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nothing about his reversion to catholicism? ] (]) 18:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
Voilà, I just wanted to put it here. |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 22:53, 9 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Without reliable sources indicating this is somehow relevant to an encyclopedic biography of Yiannopoulos, it should be left to the outlets that still feel the need to give Yiannopoulos headline space for his various stunts. ] (she/her • ]) 14:02, 10 June 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Cambridge? == |
|
|
|
|
|
Is there third-party evidence that he went to Cambridge? The only source seems to be him claiming that he did (but got kicked out). ] (]) 08:49, 25 July 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:A search for Wolfson in the archives of this Talk does offer supporting evidence. Contemporary sources include the student news site '']'' https://thetab.com/uk/cambridge/2010/11/14/stephen-fry-lashes-out-at-wolfson-student-1867 and the Wolfson College magazine (p.137 - with photo) https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/7874550/magazine-2009-2010-wolfson-college-university-of-cambridge ] (]) 09:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Is Vice magazine a reliable source? == |
|
|
|
|
|
I mean, I have found Vice to be useful with some of its stories and not useful with others. Maybe a better source could be found regarding his anti-feminist views and so forth... such a source shouldn't be difficult to find.--] (]) 22:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== COVID-19/''Newsweek'' == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{ping|X-Editor}} I see you've re-added the information about Yiannopoulos having COVID-19, which is still only sourced to ''Newsweek''. I removed this yesterday with a summary mentioning ] and ]: . I have concerns about using that ''Newsweek'' article as a source, namely the apparent lack of fact-checking that went into an article reporting that he "had a 93-degree fever". ] (she/her • ]) 20:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:I'd be fine with waiting for another source to cover this story. ] (]) 20:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::I'd prefer that plan of action. Would you self-revert? ] (]) 20:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I removed it just now. ] (]) 02:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Thanks, I'm seeing another piece in and nothing else so far. ] (]) 02:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Milo's alleged covid situation is questionable, shady; he is a attention craving provocateur and cannot be taken seriously. "Pink" is gossip blog. He lied many times in order to become a headline news even in gossip blogs. (His whole life is a mess, especially his alleged marriage and "new" celibate life as a devout Catholic and "TruNews" contributor.) ] (]) 06:20, 26 September 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Alt-right == |
|
|
|
|
|
Milo has disavowed being a part of the alt-right movement on several occasions, as have most of the prominent right-wing pundits once associated with it. |
|
There was a leak in which he had as his computer password The Night of Long Knives as well as the date the jwews got expelled from England....there is no mention of that in his controversies. Chefs-kiss (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
He did not graduate from either the University of Manchester or the University of Cambridge, he only attended briefly before being kicked out. His infobox listing these institutions as his 'education' seems in accurate because he did not complete a program of study at either. If you look at Bill Gates' infobox it specifies that he "dropped out" of Harvard, Mark Zuckerberg's does the same - I propose doing similar for Yiannopoulos and noting that he was removed from both.Boredintheevening (talk) 16:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Why would we promote Milo's views in those long quotes, there is no need for more than what first two sentences express. Further, Milo is not "critic of Islam" to be categorized as such - his animus against Muslims expressed in million ways has taken privilege of being called "critic of Islam" from him long time ago. He is a bigot and Islamophobe, and it is unacceptable to put him in the same group as late Christopher Hitchens, for instance, who genuinely belong to a group of Islam and religion critics with legit arguments. It should be explained why something gets reverted, that's the least we owe to each other. ౪ Santa ౪ 14:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Category was rv again without TP discussion, I assume on the pretense that we have specific guideline or policy which regulates this problem and allow bold and without discussion removal - we don't, because if did we wouldn't have Category:Antisemitism in the United Kingdom filled with BP' and BLP's.--౪ Santa ౪ 19:05, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
