| Revision as of 15:06, 10 August 2023 editFMSky (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers222,311 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 07:13, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,011,971 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2] |
| (11 intermediate revisions by 6 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 58: |
Line 59: |
|
|
|
|
|
{{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) |
|
{{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) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Long quotations of Milo's views == |
|
|
|
|
|
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) |
|
|
|
|
|
: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) |
|
|
::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) |
|
|
|
|
|
== His reversion to catholicism? == |
|
|
|
|
|
nothing about his reversion to catholicism? ] (]) 18:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) |
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)
