Revision as of 07:57, 14 June 2016 editGrayfell (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers83,014 editsm Undid revision 725210904 by 178.8.140.67 (talk) Trolling. See contributions← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:07, 4 October 2016 edit undoNPalgan2 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,829 edits →WP:BLP: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
::::::::::No mention of Spencer there. ] ] 22:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC) | ::::::::::No mention of Spencer there. ] ] 22:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC) | ||
:::::::::::I'd like to suggest that we've reached consensus on this topic, based on the fact that multiple editors have agreed that the current terminology is the most accurate one, ] and ] have articulated why the current terminology is the most accurate, and the only reason this is still going on is that the only editor still arguing for a change to "white nationalist" is ], and every argument presented by him has been refuted point by point. At this point we're just stretching this argument out beyond common sense, and it's a waste of everyone's time. ] (]) 22:43, 14 March 2016 (UTC) | :::::::::::I'd like to suggest that we've reached consensus on this topic, based on the fact that multiple editors have agreed that the current terminology is the most accurate one, ] and ] have articulated why the current terminology is the most accurate, and the only reason this is still going on is that the only editor still arguing for a change to "white nationalist" is ], and every argument presented by him has been refuted point by point. At this point we're just stretching this argument out beyond common sense, and it's a waste of everyone's time. ] (]) 22:43, 14 March 2016 (UTC) | ||
== WP:BLP == | |||
"Misplaced Pages's sourcing policy, Verifiability, says that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not meeting this standard may be removed. This policy extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion." ] (]) 03:07, 4 October 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:07, 4 October 2016
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
White nationalist or white supremacist?
I think it should be included in the lead that he is a white nationalist, not just white supremacist, which is often used a dysphemism, but the sources we are using identifies him as so. He is also identified as a white nationalist only. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 01:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- White nationalist is what white supremacists call themselves.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 01:55, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages differentiates between the two, so that's WP:POV from you. Just no. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 02:33, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- SPLC dscribes him as white nationalist and white separatist. And mentions white supremacy twice.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 03:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)They are different in principle, but in practice the difference is barely acknowledged by most sources. The article says he's president of a white nationalist think tank, so the connection is made perfectly clear in the lede. Over-emphasizing this difference is pointless and non-neutral, and as white nationalism points out, white nationalists avoid the word supremacy because of its negative connotations. While it's preposterous to pretend that "white nationalist" doesn't have the same negative connotations, it doesn't matter because Misplaced Pages doesn't use WP:EUPHEMISMs. Also, white supremacists are described by Misplaced Pages as a subset of white nationalists, so what's the problem with the current wording? How many layers of redundancy do we really need here? Grayfell (talk) 03:14, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Agree with Grayfell on this point. Many reliable sources describe him as a white supremacist. As a result, that's the more accurate description, as it's a subset of white nationalist. Rockypedia (talk) 12:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
- Sources didn't mean that he's a white supremacist in the sense of him adhering to a subset, the sources meant he's a white supremacist in the POV way. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 23:13, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Connor Machiavelli:, what does "in a pov way" mean? I am never clear what you mean by that and I don't think you are. I'd also like to know when you think it's acceptable to use the term "white supremacist" as you rarely if ever agree to using it. Note please that I'd appreciate answers to both questions. Doug Weller talk 09:26, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- I mean sources define him in different ways. According to Misplaced Pages, I don't think he's a white supremacist of white nationalism, prove he adds ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to his ideology, then. Also WP:UNDUE. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 20:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you mean. What does "According to Misplaced Pages" mean? I don't understand any of the rest either. Why would I prove anything? What do social Darwinism and Nazism have to do with this? Nor do I understand why at Alt-right you want to keep in material sourced only to one poor source, while here you think WP:UNDUE can be applied to something with 3 sources. 4 soon I think, checking another one. Doug Weller talk 21:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- It already says he's a white nationalist, so why different wording? "White separatism and white supremacy are subgroups within white nationalism. The former seek a separate white state, while the latter add ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to their ideology." from white nationalism on Misplaced Pages. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 21:16, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Your reasoning is original research. We go by what reliable sources say, and we don't use Misplaced Pages as a source. Doug Weller talk 21:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Nope, Misplaced Pages has the source right here, http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2003/04/interviews-offer-unprecedented-look-into-the-world-and-words-of-the-new-white-nationalism-60031/ Connor Machiavelli (talk) 21:37, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- No mention of Spencer there. Doug Weller talk 22:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- I'd like to suggest that we've reached consensus on this topic, based on the fact that multiple editors have agreed that the current terminology is the most accurate one, Doug Weller and Grayfell have articulated why the current terminology is the most accurate, and the only reason this is still going on is that the only editor still arguing for a change to "white nationalist" is Connor Machiavelli, and every argument presented by him has been refuted point by point. At this point we're just stretching this argument out beyond common sense, and it's a waste of everyone's time. Rockypedia (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- No mention of Spencer there. Doug Weller talk 22:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Nope, Misplaced Pages has the source right here, http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2003/04/interviews-offer-unprecedented-look-into-the-world-and-words-of-the-new-white-nationalism-60031/ Connor Machiavelli (talk) 21:37, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Your reasoning is original research. We go by what reliable sources say, and we don't use Misplaced Pages as a source. Doug Weller talk 21:28, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- It already says he's a white nationalist, so why different wording? "White separatism and white supremacy are subgroups within white nationalism. The former seek a separate white state, while the latter add ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to their ideology." from white nationalism on Misplaced Pages. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 21:16, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you mean. What does "According to Misplaced Pages" mean? I don't understand any of the rest either. Why would I prove anything? What do social Darwinism and Nazism have to do with this? Nor do I understand why at Alt-right you want to keep in material sourced only to one poor source, while here you think WP:UNDUE can be applied to something with 3 sources. 4 soon I think, checking another one. Doug Weller talk 21:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- I mean sources define him in different ways. According to Misplaced Pages, I don't think he's a white supremacist of white nationalism, prove he adds ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to his ideology, then. Also WP:UNDUE. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 20:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Connor Machiavelli:, what does "in a pov way" mean? I am never clear what you mean by that and I don't think you are. I'd also like to know when you think it's acceptable to use the term "white supremacist" as you rarely if ever agree to using it. Note please that I'd appreciate answers to both questions. Doug Weller talk 09:26, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
- Sources didn't mean that he's a white supremacist in the sense of him adhering to a subset, the sources meant he's a white supremacist in the POV way. Connor Machiavelli (talk) 23:13, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Agree with Grayfell on this point. Many reliable sources describe him as a white supremacist. As a result, that's the more accurate description, as it's a subset of white nationalist. Rockypedia (talk) 12:10, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
WP:BLP
"Misplaced Pages's sourcing policy, Verifiability, says that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not meeting this standard may be removed. This policy extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion." NPalgan2 (talk) 03:07, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Categories:- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- Unassessed Chicago articles
- Unknown-importance Chicago articles
- WikiProject Chicago articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Unassessed United States articles
- Unknown-importance United States articles
- Unassessed United States articles of Unknown-importance
- WikiProject United States articles