Misplaced Pages

Talk:Animal Liberation Front: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:34, 23 March 2019 editQzekrom (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,279 edits →Copyvio link?: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 22:40, 15 October 2024 edit undoTryptofish (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers69,497 edits →Shouldn't we mention that at least one of these firebombings was actually an undercover cop: need a source 
(45 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{Censor}}
|maxarchivesize = 250K
{{Article history
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:Animal rights/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=GAN |action1=GAN
|action1date=27 October 2007 |action1date=27 October 2007
Line 14: Line 9:
|topic=socsci |topic=socsci
}} }}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=
{{WP1.0|WPCD=y}}
{{WikiProject Anarchism}}
{{talk header|search=yes}}
{{WikiProject Animal rights| class=B| importance=top}} {{WikiProject Animal rights| importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low}}
{| cellpadding=3 cellspacing=0 style="float:right;text-align:center; border:solid 1px black; background:rgb(230,245,230);margin=5"
{{WikiProject Organizations|importance=Low}}
| align=center|'''Archives'''<br>]
}}
|-
{{Annual readership|days=90}}
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config
]
|archiveheader = {{aan}}
]
|maxarchivesize = 150K
]
|counter = 3
|}
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:Animal Liberation Front/Archive %(counter)d
}}

<noinclude>{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=Animal Liberation Front}}</noinclude> <noinclude>{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=Animal Liberation Front}}</noinclude>
__TOC__ __TOC__


== Terrorist Group ==
== Violence and terrorism debate ==
They have been cited as a Terrorist group along with the ELF for the over $110 million of damages, threats, intimidation, instructions on bomb making being made publicly available. Link: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-109shrg32209/html/CHRG-109shrg32209.htm

I note a large cadre of ALF apologists, constantly rewriting this page to paint this terror group in a glowing innocent light and adding in various retorts and claims of "false flag" operations, which would be laughable if this group's activities were not so serious and life endangering. Its damned shameful and no better than those who defend neo nazi groups <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:19, 1 December 2021 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
CharlesMartel, re. removal of 12 year old quote: I agree that having an old quote like this doesn't make sense; however, it is notable how incorrect this expert's opinion turns out to have been. Since it is a recurring theme that ALF will eventually hurt people, perhaps it is notable to include that expert opinions about danger to human life from ALF have not materialized? ] (]) 14:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
:Engaging in ad hominem attacks and bad faith editing (see: ]) is not a good way to build a case for your preferred version of the article, and ], either.--] (]) 20:46, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Looking at the passage in question, it strikes me that there are two parts to it: (1) a statement about ALF being the most serious threat, and (2) the prediction that there would soon be a death. Charles makes, I think, a valid point that the second part is now of dubious relevance, and it would be difficult to make Bob's interpretation clear without resorting to SYNTH. On the other hand, the first half of the statement seems to me to remain valid, and so I would suggest restoring that part, minus the prediction. I'm going to do that as a BOLD edit; please feel free to revert me if you disagree. --] (]) 18:27, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
:P.S.: I do think the shortened version is appropriate, because it shows an observer describing it as "the most serious", which is documentation of the subject's notability. (And, by the way, the passage really should not have been deleted as a "minor edit.") --] (]) 18:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
::Trypto - no problem with your edit. However, if this guy is such an expert, why was he so wrong in the now-removed quote? My suggestion is that this guy is not an expert, simply an alarmist whose unfounded prediction failed to come true. Whether or not he is considered an expert by others, I would identify him as a prophet or psychic, and since he was 100% wrong during a 12 year period, I wonder about the value of the remaining quote. I think that it is simply an opinion by someone who has demonstrated his inability to form accurate opinions. ] (]) 13:44, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
:::The issue, of course, is not what you or I might think, but, indeed, what others think about his expertise. I clicked through to his bio page, and he is identified there as an expert on terrorism, about as clearly as anyone can be identified. As such, his assessment is encyclopedic, and the standard at Misplaced Pages is ], not whether he is correct. --] (]) 16:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
::::I reluctantly agree. You would think at some point this guy would become a discredited expert, but I guess he wouldn't put that on his web site. ] (]) 19:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

== Who is Molland? ==

There are a few instances where "Molland" is being mentioned in the article, but it neither introduces nor describes the person.--Bloody Rose 06:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC) <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Thanks for pointing that out! He is simply the author of some of the source material. I added a clarification at the first place his name appears. --] (]) 17:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

==Recent edits==
I'm going to make an effort to get this article up to FA status. I've been meaning to do it for years, so I'd like to finally get round to it. I've started removing repetition, tightening the writing, fixing the sources, making it less long-winded, less of a quote farm, and more MoS compliant. I'll also be expanding to try to bring it up to date (which means the 1996 onwards section will be rewritten) and rearranging material for flow. <font color="maroon">]</font> <small><sup><font color="red">]</font> <font color="green">]</font></sup></small> 20:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

:<s>Tryptofish, I've wanted for some time to try to get this to FA status, and I've repeatedly stopped the effort because of your editing. I've even taken it off my watchlist at times. It won't gain FA status by being a repetitive quote farm with material like . What does this even mean? "In 1993, ALF was listed as an organization that has "claimed to have perpetrated acts of ] in the United States". Only claimed? And why the quote marks? No one is disputing that it carries out acts of extremism. That is, indeed, its purpose, ''which the entire article makes clear''. Ditto with the rest of the material you keep inserting. Why the focus on repetitive quotes, why always the quotation marks, why always the same issue, why always the same quotes, why always the U.S.?</s>

:Please allow me to get the page in shape. It's very poorly written in places, very repetitive, a huge amount of history is missing, and it needs to be brought up to date, which will involve a lot of work. Once I have a first draft done, then we can discuss issues you feel are important and missing, and I'll be very receptive to anything that's reasonable and well-sourced. In fact, I am fairly sure you will not object to the final version. <font color="maroon">]</font> <small><sup><font color="red">]</font> <font color="green">]</font></sup></small> 22:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

:I've just read through the above. I must apologize for the harsh tone, and I've struck through the first part of it. I'm speaking out of frustration, and of course it's entirely my own responsibility if I stop editing something, not anyone else's. The bottom line is that I'd like to see a well-written article with a three-dimensional history, but also one that isn't too long or repetitive. It's already inching toward having length issues, yet a lot of material is still missing, so the writing has to be tight and focused. Every word has to be made to count. I hope you'll consider letting me try to grapple with that as it gets expanded. <font color="maroon">]</font> <small><sup><font color="red">]</font> <font color="green">]</font></sup></small> 22:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
::Thank you for that last part. That makes all the difference, and I really appreciate it. Of course, I'll be happy to do that. Perhaps you would consider doing similarly in our recent talk at ]. --] (]) 13:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== Pop culture? ==

I'm not sure the new popular culture list adds much of value to the page. What do other editors think? --] (]) 18:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
:I don't like the pop culture sections since they are usually unsourced and fairly random. If the section stays, I'd rather see it as a paragraph discussing how ALF is depicted in pop culture, which would require refs and might be more valuable in the article than a simple list. ] (]) 16:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
::I agree with that. I'd add that I am leaning towards deleting the section, in its present form. It's mostly unsourced, and the content that does not duplicate information already available on the page seems rather trivial and uninformative. I'd support a paragraph discussion if, per secondary sources, there was a case that it shows aspects of how ALF is perceived by others, either favorably or unfavorably, but this just looks to me like an unsourced trivia list. Any objections to deleting it? --] (]) 16:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think anyone is going to argue for keeping this section in its present form, so I'm going to delete it. --] (]) 19:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
:::OK, well here it is for future reference so maybe a paragragh could be written:

*Folk musician ] performs many songs in defence of the ALF.
*The ALF were fictionalized in the 2005 novel ''The Cause'' by Jane Mann.
*The ALF were fictionalized in the 2006 novel ''Animal Instinct'' by Dorothy H. Hayes.
*The ALF were fictionalized in the 2001 novel ''Rage and Reason'' by ].
*The ALF were fictionalized in the 2002 British movie '']''.
*The ALF were fictionalized in the 1996 movie '']''.
*The 2010 movie ''Bold Native'' centres on the ALF.<ref>http://boldnative.com/</ref>
*Featured in the episode ''Animal Rites'' from Season 5 of ].
*The 2006 ] documentary, '']'' centres on the ALF. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

{{reflist-talk}}

== Marineland in Morecambe ==

The article on Morecambe makes no mention of a Marineland there, and the cited link here is dead. ] (]) 03:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

== A problem in Philosophy of direct action ==

The Philosophy of direct action section features the following words: “''The provision against violence in the ALF code has triggered divisions within the movement and allegations of hypocrisy from the ALF's critics.''”.

The problem is that whatever follows the text doesn't have any allegations of hypocrisy or explanations as to how the provision has triggered the divisions within the movement. In other words, the first part says that because of the ALF being against hurting humans or animals there are disagreements on that within the movement and that some critics call the ALF hypocritical. The second part either speaks of the accusations of terrorism in general or vandalism, both of these things being unrelated to the first part. --] (]) 21:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

== External links modified ==


Hello fellow Wikipedians,


Nah you are absolutely wrong. ALF is fully justified in all its actions ] (]) 14:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I have just modified {{plural:9|one external link|9 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/history.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ppo.gov.uk/download/199-059OnTheCase16.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060926070840/http://www.adl.org/learn/extremism_in_america_updates/movements/ecoterrorism/eco050125.htm to http://www.adl.org/learn/extremism_in_america_updates/movements/ecoterrorism/eco050125.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/Writings_Speeches/whos_afraid_of_jerry_vlasak.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/Writings_Speeches/whos_afraid_of_jerry_vlasak.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://arkangelweb.org/barry/barry.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animalliberationpressoffice.org/history.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://onlineethics.org/reseth/nbac/hmccarthy.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402235448/http://www.komonews.com/news/local/7835502.html to http://www.komonews.com/news/local/7835502.html


== Voice of ALF ==
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}).


ALF is a leaderless group with no membership or staff roster, and "ALF" has traditionally been used as a "banner" or "tag" for labelling an action as being "part of ALF" or "for ALF". As such, "it" (meaning ALF) doesn't have a voice, an opinion, or a viewpoint. Only people do. I reverted several edits which had been made that changed the ALF "voice" in the article. This is incorrect. ALF doesn't promote anything; only individuals (who might associate themselves with ALF) can promote, act, speak or have an opinion. ] (]) 22:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}
:If you really want to be technical, no organization has a voice, only the people do. People who share the same opinions just use organizations to help promote their opinion, but that would be too tedious to constantly explain. While some organizations are leaderless and decentralized, that doesn't mean they're voiceless. Is BLM voiceless? Was the Occupy Movement voiceless? Of course not. In the ALF's case, it has spokespeople. It has a code, a philosophy, and it even has press offices! That is not a voiceless organization. We probably wouldn't even have this article if it was truly voiceless. ] (]) 23:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
::I wasn't referring to voice as in voicebox on a human, but closer to ]. An organization with no people, one that is just a loose collection of ideas/ideals, has no "voice". The actors associated with the organization ''can'' speak in a voice. The Misplaced Pages article needs to be written to keep that clear. I presume that's why ALF and similar organizations created a "press office" so they could actually "speak" in the voice of the organization. But that's not what's happening here in those edits you had changed. Those ideas/utterances were not from a "press office". ] (]) 05:16, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


== ARM content ==
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 07:45, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


I removed some content about the actions on the ARM since it wasn't about the ALF, but this was reverted because discussion was wanted due to the size of the content removed. So, any reason why this content should be on this article instead of the ARM article? ] (]) 03:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
== External links modified ==


:It looks like a section explaining the interrelationship between ALF, ARM and JD. There is this document that might explain further why the MARS poisoning event is in the ALF article. ] (]) 04:42, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
::I understand that, but I'm talking about the paragraph of other events that happened later and were attributed to the ARM. ] (]) 04:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)


:::I do not know what you're referring to. I only looked at the edit history, saw what you had deleted (and another editor reverted). It's the paragraph starting "From 1983 onwards". ] (]) 05:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I have just modified 3 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
::::Ugh! I hate these ALF articles. I see I got the wrong paragraph. It's all gibberish to me. These organizations "claim" this and that, and these are all history, so ignore my MARS explanation. I don't have enough brain cells left today to devote to this. ] (]) 05:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927011750/http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/13rod.html to http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/13rod.html
:::::It's all good. This article needs some work. So do you think the actual paragraph belongs in the ARM article instead?
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060623122808/http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/22robin.html to http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/22robin.html
::::::There's no reason a paragraph couldn't be in more than one article. I'm not inclined to read all that history just to answer whether it's ARM ''or'' ALF. It might well be both since these orgs often had a lot of crossover/overlap. ] (]) 00:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://archive.thisislancashire.co.uk/2001/11/8/649628.html
:::::::Should a paragraph on apples be used in an article about oranges? Also, if you're going to edit an article's content, you have a responsibility to at least read it. ] (]) 01:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060623122808/http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/22robin.html to http://www.nocompromise.org/issues/22robin.html
:::::::: ]. ] (]) 02:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::That has to do with taking breaks. It is not justification to not understand what you're editing. ] (]) 02:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)


== FBI source ==
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.


] is not a useful addition to the article, especially as it was included in . We could reasonably summarize the content it has on ALF and include it as a reference, but we would need to be careful about using straightforward statements that hew to the primary source.
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}


As it is, the image displayed is entirely unhelpful, and it's not accurate to say (as the caption currently does), that the FBI "associates the ALF with domestic terrorism", as the document itself is heavily hedged and never makes so broad a claim. Pinging {{u|Tryptofish}}, who recently reverted my removal. ] (] / ]) 19:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 06:27, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
:Not a big deal to me, so I self-reverted. --] (]) 19:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)


== Shouldn't we mention that at least one of these firebombings was actually an undercover cop ==
== Copyvio link? ==


Seems relevant. ] (]) 03:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Someone added an external link in but immediately tagged it as {{tl|copyvio link}} for some reason. Should the tag be removed? Even if the link isn't infringing, I think it might not be a reliable source. <span style="white-space: nowrap;">] ] <sup>they</sup><sub>them</sub></span> 22:34, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
:We would need a source (reference). --] (]) 22:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 22:40, 15 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Animal Liberation Front article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
Censorship warningMisplaced Pages is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Misplaced Pages's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.
Former good article nomineeAnimal Liberation Front was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 27, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconAnarchism
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anarchism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anarchism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnarchismWikipedia:WikiProject AnarchismTemplate:WikiProject Anarchismanarchism
 Anarchism WikiProject open tasks
watch · edit · history · talk · purge
Recognized content · Drafts & requests · Subscribe · Member list · Resources · How can I help?

Articles for deletion

Good article nominees

Peer reviews

Articles for creation

Cleanup (0) · Potentially related articles · Recent edits · Recent Commons images · Stub expansion project (512)

WikiProject iconAnimal rights Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of animal rights on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconCrime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconOrganizations Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


Toolbox

Terrorist Group

They have been cited as a Terrorist group along with the ELF for the over $110 million of damages, threats, intimidation, instructions on bomb making being made publicly available. Link: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-109shrg32209/html/CHRG-109shrg32209.htm I note a large cadre of ALF apologists, constantly rewriting this page to paint this terror group in a glowing innocent light and adding in various retorts and claims of "false flag" operations, which would be laughable if this group's activities were not so serious and life endangering. Its damned shameful and no better than those who defend neo nazi groups — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.56.14 (talk) 20:19, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Engaging in ad hominem attacks and bad faith editing (see: WP:GF) is not a good way to build a case for your preferred version of the article, and ridiculous comparisons to neo-Nazis probably won't help, either.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 20:46, 1 December 2021 (UTC)


Nah you are absolutely wrong. ALF is fully justified in all its actions RJS001 (talk) 14:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Voice of ALF

ALF is a leaderless group with no membership or staff roster, and "ALF" has traditionally been used as a "banner" or "tag" for labelling an action as being "part of ALF" or "for ALF". As such, "it" (meaning ALF) doesn't have a voice, an opinion, or a viewpoint. Only people do. I reverted several edits which had been made that changed the ALF "voice" in the article. This is incorrect. ALF doesn't promote anything; only individuals (who might associate themselves with ALF) can promote, act, speak or have an opinion. Normal Op (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

If you really want to be technical, no organization has a voice, only the people do. People who share the same opinions just use organizations to help promote their opinion, but that would be too tedious to constantly explain. While some organizations are leaderless and decentralized, that doesn't mean they're voiceless. Is BLM voiceless? Was the Occupy Movement voiceless? Of course not. In the ALF's case, it has spokespeople. It has a code, a philosophy, and it even has press offices! That is not a voiceless organization. We probably wouldn't even have this article if it was truly voiceless. Mariolovr (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
I wasn't referring to voice as in voicebox on a human, but closer to Writer's voice. An organization with no people, one that is just a loose collection of ideas/ideals, has no "voice". The actors associated with the organization can speak in a voice. The Misplaced Pages article needs to be written to keep that clear. I presume that's why ALF and similar organizations created a "press office" so they could actually "speak" in the voice of the organization. But that's not what's happening here in those edits you had changed. Those ideas/utterances were not from a "press office". Normal Op (talk) 05:16, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

ARM content

I removed some content about the actions on the ARM since it wasn't about the ALF, but this was reverted because discussion was wanted due to the size of the content removed. So, any reason why this content should be on this article instead of the ARM article? Mariolovr (talk) 03:23, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

It looks like a section explaining the interrelationship between ALF, ARM and JD. There is this document that might explain further why the MARS poisoning event is in the ALF article. Normal Op (talk) 04:42, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I understand that, but I'm talking about the paragraph of other events that happened later and were attributed to the ARM. Mariolovr (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I do not know what you're referring to. I only looked at the edit history, saw what you had deleted (and another editor reverted). It's the paragraph starting "From 1983 onwards". Normal Op (talk) 05:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Ugh! I hate these ALF articles. I see I got the wrong paragraph. It's all gibberish to me. These organizations "claim" this and that, and these are all history, so ignore my MARS explanation. I don't have enough brain cells left today to devote to this. Normal Op (talk) 05:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
It's all good. This article needs some work. So do you think the actual paragraph belongs in the ARM article instead?
There's no reason a paragraph couldn't be in more than one article. I'm not inclined to read all that history just to answer whether it's ARM or ALF. It might well be both since these orgs often had a lot of crossover/overlap. Normal Op (talk) 00:29, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Should a paragraph on apples be used in an article about oranges? Also, if you're going to edit an article's content, you have a responsibility to at least read it. Mariolovr (talk) 01:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
WP:NOTCOMPULSORY. Normal Op (talk) 02:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
That has to do with taking breaks. It is not justification to not understand what you're editing. Mariolovr (talk) 02:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

FBI source

File:Domestic Terrorism Symbols Guide Part 01.pdf is not a useful addition to the article, especially as it was included in this edit. We could reasonably summarize the content it has on ALF and include it as a reference, but we would need to be careful about using straightforward statements that hew to the primary source.

As it is, the image displayed is entirely unhelpful, and it's not accurate to say (as the caption currently does), that the FBI "associates the ALF with domestic terrorism", as the document itself is heavily hedged and never makes so broad a claim. Pinging Tryptofish, who recently reverted my removal. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Not a big deal to me, so I self-reverted. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't we mention that at least one of these firebombings was actually an undercover cop

Seems relevant. 2604:3D09:D78:1000:7CB2:BC52:EF01:E8DD (talk) 03:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

We would need a source (reference). --Tryptofish (talk) 22:40, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Categories: