Revision as of 21:37, 13 February 2019 editTDKR Chicago 101 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users36,034 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 14:11, 12 November 2024 edit undoTom.Reding (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Template editors3,879,760 editsm →top: blpo=yes + blp=no/null → blp=other; cleanupTag: AWB |
(47 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown) |
Line 9: |
Line 9: |
|
|currentstatus=FFAC |
|
|currentstatus=FFAC |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|blp=other|listas=Larouche, Lyndon|1= |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blpo=yes |1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography| living=no |
|
{{WikiProject Biography| politician-work-group=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Virginia| importance=low}} |
|
| class=B |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=low}} |
|
| politician-work-group=yes |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low|American=yes |American-importance=low}} |
|
| listas=Larouche, Lyndon }} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Virginia| class=B |
|
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low|NH=yes|NH-importance=Low}} |
|
| importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|class=B|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Economics}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject United States|class=B|importance=Low|NH=Yes|NH-importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Activists|class=B}} |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
{{Annual readership}} |
Line 27: |
Line 21: |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|
|counter = 26 |
|
|counter = 26 |
|
|algo = old(60d) |
|
|algo = old(61d) |
|
|archive = Talk:Lyndon LaRouche/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Lyndon LaRouche/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}}<!--Automatically goes to a new archive page if the archive is over 250 kB, threads with no new comments in the last 60 days get moved to the current archive page. Archiving is done once a day around midnight UTC--> |
|
}}<!--Automatically goes to a new archive page if the archive is over 250 kB, threads with no new comments in the last two months get moved to the current archive page. Archiving is done once a day around midnight UTC--> |
|
{{Auto archiving notice|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=2 |units=months }} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Press |
|
{{Online source|year=2004 |section=January 2004 |
|
|
|
|year=2004 |
|
|
|section=January 2004 |
|
|title=LaRouche for president: The campaign that keeps on going |
|
|title=LaRouche for president: The campaign that keeps on going |
|
|org=Loudon Times-Mirror |
|
|org=Loudon Times-Mirror |
|
|date=January 27, 2004 |
|
|date=January 27, 2004 |
|
|url=http://www.timescommunity.com/site/tab1.cfm?newsid=10876575&BRD=2553&PAG=461&dept_id=506040&rfi=6 |
|
|url=http://www.timescommunity.com/site/tab1.cfm?newsid=10876575&BRD=2553&PAG=461&dept_id=506040&rfi=6 |
|
|
|year2=2006 |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Online source|year=2006 |section=June 2006 |
|
|section2=June 2006 |
|
|title=Can History Be Open Source? Misplaced Pages and the Future of the Past |
|
|title2=Can History Be Open Source? Misplaced Pages and the Future of the Past |
|
|org=The Journal of American History |
|
|org2=The Journal of American History |
|
|date=June 2006 |
|
|date2=June 2006 |
|
|url=http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/justtop.cgi?act=justtop&url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jah/93.1/rosenzweig.html |
|
|url2=http://www.historycooperative.org/cgi-bin/justtop.cgi?act=justtop&url=http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jah/93.1/rosenzweig.html |
|
|
|year3=2009 |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Online source|year=2009 |section=Featured |
|
|section3=Featured |
|
|title=Sierra Madre Actor Takes a Stand Against LaRouche Propaganda |
|
|title3=Sierra Madre Actor Takes a Stand Against LaRouche Propaganda |
|
|org=The Sierra Madre Weekly |
|
|org3=The Sierra Madre Weekly |
|
|date= December 1, 2009 |
|
|date3= December 1, 2009 |
|
|url=http://sierramadreweekly.com/featured/sierra-madre-actor-take-a-stand-against-the-larouche-propaganda-camp/ |
|
|url3=http://sierramadreweekly.com/featured/sierra-madre-actor-take-a-stand-against-the-larouche-propaganda-camp/ |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
<br clear="all" /> |
|
<br clear="all" /> |
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=Lyndon LaRouche}} |
|
{{Misplaced Pages:Featured article tools|1=Lyndon LaRouche}} |
|
<inputbox> |
|
|
|
|
|
== Untitled == |
|
|
|
|
|
bgcolor=transparent |
|
|
type=fulltext |
|
|
prefix=Talk:Lyndon LaRouche |
|
|
break=yes |
|
|
width=60 |
|
|
searchbuttonlabel=Search Lyndon LaRouche talk archives |
|
|
</inputbox> |
|
|
*] |
|
*] |
|
*] |
|
*] |
Line 78: |
Line 62: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{LaRouchetalk}} |
|
{{LaRouchetalk}} |
|
|
{{Broken anchors|links= |
|
|
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (Mann-Chestnut hearings) ]. <!-- {"title":"Mann-Chestnut hearings","appear":null,"disappear":{"revid":608302989,"parentid":608287400,"timestamp":"2014-05-13T00:32:13Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} --> |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Policies and sources == |
|
== Policies and sources == |
Line 100: |
Line 87: |
|
*, before 1987. |
|
*, before 1987. |
|
*, 1987–present. |
|
*, 1987–present. |
|
*Mintz, John. , ''The Washington Post'', includes a series on LaRouche. |
|
*Mintz, John. , ''The Washington Post'', includes a series on LaRouche |
|
|
== Spelling error == |
|
|
|
|
==RfC: Do selective deletions of material make this article non-neutral?== |
|
|
{{Archive top|reason=There is consensus against adding a neutrality cleanup tag to this article. {{nac}} ~ <b>]</b><sup>]</sup> 12:55, 23 May 2016 (UTC)}} |
|
|
In February, a large amount of material was deleted from ]. The only explanation offered, in one of the edit summaries, was that the sources were "sketchy". Among the sources for the deleted material were the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Tribune, Corriere della Sera, and Xinhua. Other material sourced to these same publications was retained in the article. The deleted material depicted the subject in a relatively favorable light, while the retained material was unfavorable. Requests for an explanation on the talk page have gone unanswered. Should this article be considered non-neutral and display the "neutrality dispute" message? ] (]) 15:53, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
For reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Lyndon_LaRouche&diff=703959707&oldid=703959318 |
|
|
] (]) 16:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''No''', the article has not been made non-neutral by the removal of text which tried to make LaRouche seem like a respected thought leader in global politics when he is actually a fringe character. It's not the removal in February that made this article non-neutral, it was the much earlier additions of such text. So the removals fixed the problem. ] (]) 00:56, 23 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
::So, just to be clear: in your few, the source, for example New York Times, is not the problem, but rather that the viewpoint was incorrect? So we retain the negative comments from that source, but purge the positive comments? That's an odd approach to neutrality. ] (]) 16:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:::There was one statement sourced to ''The New York Times'' : {{tq|a Mexican official told ''The New York Times'' that LaRouche had arranged the meeting by representing himself as a Democratic Party official.}} That's hardly a positive statement. The problem is that it was included in a larger block of content misrepresenting LaRouche as a major figure in world politics by throwing out a whole bunch of insignificant meetings. See ] and ]. ]<sub>(])</sub> 16:36, 23 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''No''', that diff shows a badly needed purge of ]-violating content. ] (]) 08:12, 23 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Comment''' Summoned by the bot, It is reasonable to delete the unsourced content which the removed section had several. But there were sourced content in that section too, and I don't think they should be removed along with the junk stuff. There has to be a way to include them without conflating it with unsourced or poorly sourced commentary. I don't agree with the accusation of COATRACK. The content was directly relevant to the article subject, albeit sketchy in some parts.]<sup>]</sup> 13:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''No''' the selective edits are not harming the neutral POV. ] (]) 15:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Possibly''' I think that the deleted items should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Some are quite well sourced, some not. It looks to me like quite a few babies were tossed out with the bathwater. ] (]) 13:19, 15 May 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
{{Archive bottom}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== External links modified == |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians, |
|
|
|
|
|
I have just modified 5 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: |
|
|
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314044047/http://wissen.spiegel.de/wissen/image/show.html?did=14331971&aref=image036%2F2006%2F06%2F16%2Fcq-sp198003901310133.pdf&thumb=false to http://wissen.spiegel.de/wissen/image/show.html?did=14331971&aref=image036%2F2006%2F06%2F16%2Fcq-sp198003901310133.pdf&thumb=false |
|
|
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.larouchepub.com/exon/exon_add4_virginia.html |
|
|
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://larouchein2004.net/pages/questions/youth/030201penn004.htm |
|
|
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/Jane_Doe_v_John_Hritz/20001013_doe_quash_memo.html |
|
|
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203083630/http://www.patriotledger.com/your_vote/election-1/x128165993/Frank-meets-LaRouche-candidate-Brown-in-only-primary-debate to http://www.patriotledger.com/your_vote/election-1/x128165993/Frank-meets-LaRouche-candidate-Brown-in-only-primary-debate |
|
|
|
|
|
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. |
|
|
|
|
|
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} |
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 07:01, 28 May 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2017 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Lyndon LaRouche|answered=yes}} |
|
|
{{Main|<National Bolshevism>}} ] (]) 23:22, 25 November 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.<!-- Template:ESp --> –] (]) 12:45, 26 November 2017 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Time to clean up LaRouche entry. == |
|
|
|
|
|
There needs to be less needless glorification and more fair and accurate and balanced material on this page. ] (]) 16:09, 12 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Reported Death == |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm seeing people saying on Twitter that LaRouche has died but none of them link to reliable sources saying so; can anyone confirm or not? ] (]) (]) 23:09, 12 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
self-defence Correct spelling is: self-defense <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 03:04, 14 September 2019 (UTC)</small> |
|
Reported by their news service NSIPS.] (]) 00:55, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Living person biography-lock== |
|
:Where? How do we confirm that? Still nothing on this from any reputable national news organization that I can see. (the only Google news hit is from the blog "Boing Boing" which sources it to "Twitter." ] (]) 02:38, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
He's been dead since last year. So why is there still the tag about his being a living person? Are the cultists responsible for keeping that lock there?] (]) 02:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
::It would be helpful if you could provide a link to the New Solidarity International News Service report, {{u|Chip.berlet}}. What's available online at this moment does not meet Misplaced Pages's reliable source standards, and we should not be in a rush to update this article unless and until better sources are available. ] ] 03:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to be true, from Mike Billington of EIR Magazine - https://twitter.com/mobeir2 - but as you say, doesn't yet fit the "Reliable Source" requirements. ] (]) 04:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
:Even though I am one of the leading published critics of the LaRouche groups,I am uncomfortable with using the term "cultists" to refer to other Misplaced Pages editors. Can we simply refer to them as "pro-LaRouche editors?" ] (]) 12:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::], good conduct is most important in Misplaced Pages. |
|
:That's apparently the Twitter of ] but is not linked to from elsewhere, so although the death is pretty much a "fact", it's still not good enough for WP now. The account timeline goes back to 15 November 2016 and was created August 2014. I think the text at http://icont.ac/4dQLQ is probably the same as the report mentioned by ] above.] (]) 08:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::I see no editorial dispute. Anyone can make edits to Misplaced Pages. Everything I see labels him as deceased. What is the issue? ]] 12:29, 17 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
::Just in case there's any doubt - FB pages of top EIR people filling with condolences. https://www.facebook.com/ted.andromidas and https://www.facebook.com/pat.ruckert ... https://twitter.com/DrMatthewSweet/status/1095599994990546944 ] (]) 09:29, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Full EIRNS article from Ron Wieczorek https://www.facebook.com/ron.wieczorek/posts/2148746848481759 ] (]) 21:08, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
:::Fair enough. I am alright with Berlet's suggestion.] (]) 18:31, 21 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Blue Raspberry, the point is: when you put the cursor over the lock symbol it says the article is protected for living persons. As you said, he does not appear to be living, so should we not remove that lock?] (]) 18:34, 21 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::{{ping|Dogru144}} Sorry, I missed your message a year ago. |
|
|
:::::{{ping|Lectonar}} ] in 2016. The tooltip on the lock does say that it is in place as a biography of a living person. LaRouche has been in heaven since February 2019, so no longer living. Per the request here, could we try without semi-protection until and unless problems arise? ]] 00:38, 2 July 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I plain missed that he died. Anyway, this article's subject was a big topic in Misplaced Pages once, with big problems. Which makes me not very comfortable with complete unprotection. So I will meet you in the middle: I will put it on pending-changes protection, so that everyone can edit it, but there will be a little stopper for vandalism trying to trickle in. The frequency of edits as it is now will not put too much of a strain on pending-changes reviewers. Note: any admin who wants to unprotect completely: go right ahead, no need to ask me. Cheers and happy editing. ] (]) 06:27, 2 July 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::{{ping|Lectonar}} Great response, thanks! ]] 20:26, 2 July 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's locked so the perjorative and non-objective tone STAYS. Stop complaining. He was nuts. Right? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 23:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
Good evening everyone, what about this? https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/2/12/1834283/-Lyndon-LaRouche-has-died-but-his-CTs-live-on ] (]) 04:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:Not a credible source, unfortunately. Says at the top that it's a community post not reviewed by Daily Kos staff, and the article itself is just echoing what some people are saying on Twitter. ] (]) 06:04, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
::I am increasingly convinced that LaRouche is dead, but we really must have a reliable source reporting it in order to add it to this article. Misplaced Pages is not a breaking news source. ] ] 06:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
It feels strange to be in a social transitional period where we can get plausible death reports but for there to be a disconnect to not have a statement from his institution or follow up from other media houses. LaRouche has been a monumental figure for decades and I expect broad interest in reports of his death. I confirm, nothing on his organization's website and seemingly nothing except rumors in online channels which report statements from individuals' social media accounts. ]] 15:53, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Lydon LaRouche == |
|
::I'm shocked by the complete lack of confirmation. This man is iconic, like it or not. --] (]) 18:12, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
::: If he hasn't actually died (i.e. the reports are all baseless rumours), then there's nothing for them to confirm. A denial would be a different thing. -- ] </sup></span>]] 21:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is clear that the LaRouche movement and organisation, founded by its name giver, is a political fascist sect. They practice brainwashing. Sometimes they function as suborganisations and thus try to avoid prosecution. Directly or indirectly they are responsible for many destroyed existences, even up to deaths and suicides. A dangerous organisation! Stay away from them and anyone supporting or trivialisinf them. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2019 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== ] has an ]== |
|
{{edit semi-protected|Lyndon LaRouche|answered=yes}} |
|
|
Larouche died on Tuesday, February 12, 2019. ] (]) 04:40, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done:''' please provide ] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 04:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>''']''' has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the ''']'''.<!-- Template:Rfc notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 20:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC) |
|
::Alas, it does seem there is a reliabilty issue with all LaRouchite information sources. But why does this not extend to the questionable claims by his supporters on other pages about the LaRouchians here on Misplaced Pages?] (]) 09:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Probably because no experienced, uninvolved Misplaced Pages editor has taken a close look at those pages, {{u|Chip.berlet}}. ] ] 16:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Supreme Court cases? == |
|
His death has been confirmed in public posts by people inside and favorable to the LaRouche network. Here are some confirmations: |
|
|
. |
|
|
From LaRouchites: |
|
|
https://www.facebook.com/ted.andromidas |
|
|
. |
|
|
https://www.facebook.com/pat.ruckert |
|
|
] (]) 11:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This page currently says "At least ten appeals were heard by the United States Court of Appeals, '''and three were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court'''", and the page ] vaguely implies similar things. However, I am having a devil of a time actually finding any LaRouche-based SCOTUS cases or decisions (with the exception of United States v. Kokinda, which is tangential). I am hoping someone can point me to those cases, and we should cite/link to them on this page or the criminal trials page. However, I suspect that none exist, and what this wikipedia article may be trying to say is that appeals were made to the Supreme Court, which denied them; if that's so, then none of the cases were ever '''heard''' by the Supreme Court. That would explain why I can find, eg, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/osg/briefs/1989/01/01/sg890463.txt, but no follow up. ] (]) 12:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC) |
|
== Nominated for the main page at ITN == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I haven't been able to find any either. I guess the description on the other page ], "three were appealed to the ]," is the more accurate one. ] (]) 15:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
{{ITN nom}} -] (]) 21:35, 13 February 2019 (UTC) |
|
"Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject ...
"Living persons may publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used as a source only if—
LaRouche lived all his adult life in New York (1953–1983) or Virginia (1983–present), which means the two major newspapers of record are The New York Times and The Washington Post. Both have written extensively about him, including several extended investigative and analysis pieces from the 1970s to the 2000s. These articles provide the structure of much of this article—in that we highlight what they highlight. For their archives on LaRouche see below. For the books we use see here.
He's been dead since last year. So why is there still the tag about his being a living person? Are the cultists responsible for keeping that lock there?Dogru144 (talk) 02:57, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
It is clear that the LaRouche movement and organisation, founded by its name giver, is a political fascist sect. They practice brainwashing. Sometimes they function as suborganisations and thus try to avoid prosecution. Directly or indirectly they are responsible for many destroyed existences, even up to deaths and suicides. A dangerous organisation! Stay away from them and anyone supporting or trivialisinf them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oliachay (talk • contribs) 19:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
This page currently says "At least ten appeals were heard by the United States Court of Appeals, and three were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court", and the page LaRouche criminal trials vaguely implies similar things. However, I am having a devil of a time actually finding any LaRouche-based SCOTUS cases or decisions (with the exception of United States v. Kokinda, which is tangential). I am hoping someone can point me to those cases, and we should cite/link to them on this page or the criminal trials page. However, I suspect that none exist, and what this wikipedia article may be trying to say is that appeals were made to the Supreme Court, which denied them; if that's so, then none of the cases were ever heard by the Supreme Court. That would explain why I can find, eg, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/osg/briefs/1989/01/01/sg890463.txt, but no follow up. Dingolover6969 (talk) 12:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)