| Revision as of 23:46, 18 October 2022 editCerealContainer (talk | contribs)275 edits Made myself more clear with what I meant← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 19:40, 13 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,304,377 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Richard B. Spencer/Archive 7) (bot |
| (84 intermediate revisions by 35 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{talk header|archive_age=2|archive_units=months|archive_bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}} |
|
|
{{Ds/talk notice|restriction=1RR|topic=ap}} |
|
|
{{Ds/talk notice|blp|restricting=1RR|style=brief}} |
|
|
{{controversial}} |
|
{{controversial}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=C|listas=Spencer, Richard B.|1= |
|
{{Archive basics |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|politician-work-group=yes|politician-priority=low}} |
|
|archive = Talk:Richard B. Spencer/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Dallas-Fort Worth|importance=low}} |
|
|counter = 4 |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Montana|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low|American=yes|American-importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject United States|importance=low|MA=yes|MA-importance=low|Texas=yes|Texas-importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=Low}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=C|listas=Spencer, Richard B.}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Dallas-Fort Worth|class=C}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Montana|class=C|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|fascism=yes|class=C}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject United States|class=C|importance=low|MA=yes|Texas=yes|Texas-importance=low}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Trolling}} |
|
|
{{Press |
|
{{Press |
|
| subject = talk page |
|
| subject = talk page |
| Line 24: |
Line 18: |
|
| accessdate = September 9, 2017 |
|
| accessdate = September 9, 2017 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/page restriction talk notice|1RR=yes|topic=ap}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/page restriction talk notice|blp|1RR=yes|style=brief}} |
|
|
{{Archive basics |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Richard B. Spencer/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
|counter = 4 |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Trolling}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|counter = 6 |
|
|counter = 7 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|algo = old(61d) |
|
|algo = old(61d) |
|
|archive = Talk:Richard B. Spencer/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Richard B. Spencer/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Activists|class=C}} |
|
|
{{Old moves |
|
{{Old moves |
|
| list = |
|
| list = |
| Line 43: |
Line 45: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Wife abuse in lead == |
|
== Spencer has changed his views == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
He says - rather convincingly in my view - that he is no longer a white nationalist and no longer associates with neo-Nazis, alt -right, etc. While of course we should not remove his scurrilous past of Nazi rhetoric, etc, I think per WP:BLP we should clarify in the opening paragraph that he has changed his views, or at least claims to have, rather than simply presenting him as a "neo-nazi, antisemitic conspiracy theorist, and white nationalist." ] (]) 03:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
Should the following text be included in the lead, as the final sentence of the fourth paragraph? |
|
|
|
:So? (see ]). ] (]) 12:40, 22 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
:{{tq|Spencer has also been accused in court proceedings of repeatedly beating and otherwise physically abusing his ex-wife Nina Kouprianova, including when she was 4 months pregnant, and frequently in front of their children.}} |
|
|
{{U|ValarianB}} has expressed opposition while myself and {{U|CozyandDozy}} have supported inclusion. I believe the last discussion about this was at ], which didn't reach a decisive consensus. From my perspective, there is no reason to exclude this significant part of the subject's life and coverage in reliable sources when it can comfortably fit in the existing fourth paragraph. I see no ] issue in repeating uncontested, non-editorial fact (court proceedings have taken place relating to subject X). — ] (''']''') 13:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:I am not sure that the accusation (and that is all it is) of repeatedly beating and otherwise physically abusing his ex-wife Nina Kouprianova is a "significant part of the subject's life". If he is found guilty that might be a different matter.] (]) 13:43, 17 December 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::Why might that be different? We rely on reliable secondary sources in determining due weight, not legal systems of one particular country. But if you want to go the legal route, it is of course not simply an "accusation" but a lot of sworn testimony and evidence provided by multiple people. — ] (''']''') 16:55, 17 December 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
:::], we do not include salacious accusations in the lead.] (]) 16:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I find the use of the word "salacious" on the topic of physical violence against women (whether it happened or not) quite hurtful—could you find another word? You'll have to point me to the part of ] which distinguishes content appropriate for the body but not the lead because I'm having trouble finding it. — ] (''']''') 18:15, 17 December 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::NOt in itself, but ] point to BLP and ] is clear "A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law." whilst leadbio says "The lead section must summarise the life and works of the person with due weight. ". Thus to have in the lead an unproven accusations (I would argue) violates the spirit of LEADBIO and BLP. ] is also clear, the lead is a summary of the article. This material is one paragraph, in the body, thus its inclusion in the lead is undue.] (]) 18:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== What is the source for "anti-semitic conspiracy theorist?"== |
|
== Sines v. Kessler verdict == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot find any source for this. ] (]) 03:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
Looks like the jury reached a verdict in the case in the last hour or so. I've added an initial sentence from the ] page, as well as a reaction from Spencer on his intent to appeal. I'm also currently reading through other sources to see if I can find more information on what charges he was found liable on, but given that this seems to be just happening, it's not entirely clear yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
: for starters ] ] 04:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
Sources I'm reading at the moment: , , , , , , note WaPo is a "live update" style page so there might be a better one to link to later. . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Ukraine/Russia == |
|
I'll be adding more to this as I read it. ] (]) 21:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:Ok, I think I've added the information relevant only to Spencer. At least all that exists at the current time. There may be more to follow in the coming hours and days, but this at least gets the basics of the verdict in. ] (]) 22:54, 23 November 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know it is only possible under very rare circumstances to use tweet citations to demonstrate the views of an individual due to Misplaced Pages policy on self-published sources (a policy that I´m not sure I entirely agree with, nevertheless it is still policy), anyways, the point being in relation to Russia/Ukraine that the tweet that demonstrated Spencer´s newfound support for NATO and Ukraine was taken off the section on his geopolitical views, which is fine in one regard that it complies with Misplaced Pages policy but it should be strongly emphasized that Spencer is no longer a supporter of Russia as anyone would believe from simply reading the article, so we should find a source to change this. ] (]) 08:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Not to be confused with... == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I think tweet citations '''can''' demonstrate views of an individual. To quote from ]: |
|
There's a "not to be confused with..." note at the top that identifies ] as an "American islamophobe" and I'm pretty sure that's a ] violation. I mean, the article itself never identifies him as such (though apparently, he has referred to himself with the label), but rather as an "anti-Muslim author", which seems a more neutral term. |
|
|
|
:¨Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information '''about themselves''' ...¨ . |
|
|
:] (]) 13:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::However it also may not be true, so what did the edit say? ] (]) 13:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Not sure what you mean by 'what did the edit say'; please clarify? |
|
|
:::Do you mean if Spencer is lying about his own views? If he is verifiably the account holder, his earnestness in proclaiming this is not something we should litigate |
|
|
:::] (]) 13:50, 7 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::He may well be, people do it all the time (In fact he has been accused (has he not) of not being honest about his politics?), what I meant is what I said, what did (or will) the edit say? ] (]) 14:02, 7 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::And "The material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;". ] (]) 13:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Shall I restore the tweets then? ] (]) 07:33, 8 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::No, as it is "unduly self-serving", it is his claim to distance himself from criticism. ] (]) 10:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2024 == |
|
Don't get me wrong, the article makes the guy seem like "islamophobe" is a fair way to describe him, but I don't feel like it meets the standards we have for such things. Compare to ], whom it's totally fair to call a con-man, but which we don't say about him. It carries a lot of pejorative weight for an academic work. I'd fix it myself, but I'm not autoconfirmed yet. ] '''(])''' 17:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Replaced it with “anti-Islam blogger and author” ] (]) 17:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::Thank you! ] '''(])''' 21:31, 11 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Lead section is seriously outdated == |
|
|
|
|
|
The lead section of this article is very outdated, as Spencer has fully distanced himself from the alt-right, and has not held any public speakings on behalf of them for years. This is not very widely known as he has lost a lot of popularity in recent years and thus doesn’t get as much media coverage anymore, but just by looking at his Twitter one will find that he despises the alt-right these days. |
|
|
|
|
|
This article as a whole is actually very outdated, he has changed on a lot of positions. ] (]) 02:48, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:We need sources that say this. ] (]) 09:46, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Isn’t the words coming directly from his mouth via his tweets considered a source? Anyway, there are many RS sources that have discussed it, such as this one: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/08/11/unite-right-5-years-later-where-are-they-now ] (]) 13:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:No his own words would not be after all I can say all kinds of things about me (I am sexy, I am rich, I tell a dam good knock knock joke) none of which are true. As to SPLC, it does not say he is no longer alt-right, it says he says he is no longer alt-right. It does however say "Spencer continues to operate the web-based publication Radix Journal, which SPLC listed as white nationalist in 2021.", an indication they may not believe him. Nor does he say he is not alt-right just that he pulled back from the movement, not its beliefs. ] (]) 13:26, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Eh there’s quite a large difference between a person talking about their politicial beliefs and a person making false statements about their looks and wealth. But beside that… He has pulled back from the alt-right movement, as you say, so why does the lead section of the article say he is a public speaker and activist on behalf of said movement? This should be removed or changed, as he distanced himself from the movement and hasn’t been an activist or speaker on behalf of them for years. He does activism against them now. ] (]) 15:35, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Show us the reliable ] sources saying so and we will discuss this. Otherwise there is nothing to discuss. ] (]) 16:12, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:He can still belive in its values, even if he does not actively participate anymore. And (as said) we need RS saying he no longer is active, not that he claims to no longer be active. ] (]) 16:28, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::if he does not actively participate in a movement anymore, he is by definition not a current activist for said movement. Which this Misplaced Pages article states he is in the lead section. Even though sources don't expliclity state that he no longer does activism or supports the movement, this is quite clear from his own words and ACTIONS. You will not find many sources discussing it, because there is simply nothing to discuss, as he is not doing any of the stuff he used to do. He has done no speakings or other activism for that movement in 5 years. Misplaced Pages has its own policies on this, that if a thing someone is associated with does not happen for a certain period of time, it will be considered a thing of the past, and this article should reflect that. ] (]) 18:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:One thing worth adding to the conversation is that Misplaced Pages takes a historical view on things, so we are interested in what the subject has been most notable for throughout the course of his life, not what he is doing currently. If he gets a job at McDonald's, we won't change the lead sentence to "'''Richard B. Spencer''' is a service worker at a ] in Virginia". The sources we have talk about his alt-right activity.{{pb}}If you can give ''secondary'' sources that talk about Spencer having changed, wording changes are possible, but his legacy is still that of a neo-Nazi. — ] (''']''') 19:52, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::yeah, but legacy is still different to current occupation. My issue is just with the way the lead is phrased, that he ''IS'' doing this and that, when in reality it is something he has done in the past. I'm not saying his work as an activist and speaker should be replaced by anything in the article, McDonalds worker or whatever, just that it should be changed to past tense in some way. Even though that legacy will greatly outshadow anything else he'll ever do, that still doesn't mean he's currenty doing it. It's currently stated like this: ''he *is* a public speaker and activist on behalf of the alt-right movement.'' I think it should be changed to something along the lines of: ''he *was* a public speaker and activist on behalf of the alt-right movement.'' or ''he is known for having been a prominent public speaker and activist on behalf of the alt-right movement.'' It could maybe even mention the period he was doing it, from around 2016 to 2017. My main issue is just that the I find the current description, with the use of ''is'', to be wrong. ] (]) 20:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I'm not against changes like those in theory, but in practice I agree with Slatersteven's analysis of the SPLC source and you've not provided any others, so I'm left wondering ] we can claim or imply that Spencer is not an alt-right activist today. — ] (''']''') 23:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I'm primarily basing it on the stuff he himself has said in recent years (on twitter for the most part), and the fact that he hasn't done any activism/speaches for the Alt-right in years. Here's a source that explains some of it: https://www.newsweek.com/richard-spencer-joe-biden-trump-maga-1527141 if you want me to link any specific tweets I can do that also, but I assume that is not RS. ] (]) 00:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Twitter is not a good source, no, and see ] on ''Newsweek''. The source you give opens by describing Spencer as a white nationalist.{{pb}}The dangers of taking a (former/current) neo-Nazi at their word should be self-evident. Was Hitler a ]? — ] (''']''') 07:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Right, Even if we accept this source,. It's not excatly saying he has changed, only that he says he has changed. At best we could say "spent claims to have left the alt-right movement", but even that is not enough to say he is no longer a " neo-Nazi, antisemitic conspiracy theorist, and white supremacist". As none of those are in fact occupations, they are positions. ] (]) 10:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::Which is not something I'm trying to claim either, my point was purely meant to be about his position in the alt-right movement. Anything else, such as him being a neo-Nazi etc, is kind of irrelevant here, and I'm not saying he has changed on those positions. I'm only talking about the alt-right movement itself, which he has left. And I agree that we shouldn't be taking people at their word, we also have to look at their actions. And the actions back his statement up. He hasn't done any activism or speakings for the movement in 5 years, and he regularly speaks out against the movement nowadays. Also, if we can't include something simply based on a person saying it, then this entire wikipedia article has to be written, because it is already filled with many of his own direct statements and quotes. Having all of that already included shows that Misplaced Pages trusts his own word to an extent, so I don't understand why some things are included and others are omitted, especially considering the consequential nature of the specific point I'm trying to raise. ] (]) 16:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::We can't say something someone said about themselves if it can be seen as unduly self-serving. We can say what others have said about them. Now I agree we can quote him, we can't use him for that being true. ] (]) 16:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::Yes, so it should be written in that sense. My suggestion is that the line ''He is a public speaker and activist on behalf of the alt-right movement.'' should be changed to something along the lines of ''He has been a prominent public speaker and activist on behalf of the alt-right movement, but claims to have distanced himself from the movement in recent years.'' This makes clear that the information is based on his own claim, and not stated as fact. ] (]) 16:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::The problem is he is still called part of the alt-right, and still gives speeches. This https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2021/09/richard-spencer-racist-putz-is-having-a-lousy-labor-day-weekend also may shed light on why he did this. and comments like "So be patient. We'll have another day in the sun. We need to recover and return in a new form." imply (if not outright makes it clear) this is not some heartfelt change of...heart, but a purely tactical move. In fact we can't give this the nuance it needs in the lede, so shous leave it unchanged. ] (]) 16:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::Agreed. Absent secondary sourcing saying the situation has changed, we wouldn't report it as changed. — ] (]) 17:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::I don't know where you are getting it from that he still does speeches for them, he hasn't in the last 5 years. And it doesn't really matter what the reason behind his decision to leave is, whether its a tactial move or a heartfelt change of ''heart''. An action is an action, regardless of the reason behind it. Anyway, this is why I said that if there was to be a change in the article, it should be presented in a very clear way that it is coming from his own claim, and not stated as fact. ] (]) 17:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::::An action may be an action, but until an RS says it is, it is only his word, Vs what RS say. Until an RS says it is, it is not an action it is a claim. The fact he said "So be patient. We'll have another day in the sun. We need to recover and return in a new form." proves he is still speaking. ] (]) 17:55, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::::Alright, I still think something should be written about it under the category ''Alt-Right leader'' at least, if not in the lead section. He can't really be called the Alt-Right leader anymore, as he has enjoyed a much more laid back lifestyle in recent years, and the movement in general has greatly declined since its peak, or moved into new forms (Fuentes et al), where he is not involved. ] (]) 21:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::::::Has he resigned from AltRight Corporation? or the National Policy Institute? ] (]) 09:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::::::::Not sure about the AltRight Corporation, but he did say that he ''abandoned'' the National Policy Institute. That think tank hardly does anything anymore as far as I'm aware, more on that here: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2020/01/10/once-political-force-richard-spencer-and-national-policy-institute-go-quiet Anyway, can I ask why Matthew Heimbach's wikipedia page follows such a different format than this one? I have been told that we cannot use information about Spencer coming from his own mouth, but Matthew Heimbach's page is filled with such information in the lead. It talks about his own claims and what he himself identifies as. I find it odd that we're seemingly following different rules here. ] (]) 14:11, 23 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
{{od}} |
|
|
I have no idea, I do not watch that page, you need to ask them. And we need RS saying "he ''abandoned'' the National Policy Institute". There may be many reasons, and no one has said we can't say he denies being alt-right, just that what he says can't be used to overturn what RS say. ] (]) 14:57, 23 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:I think what you're missing, Torbslifre, is the subtle difference between a subject saying X and a reliable source saying "the subject said X". The latter shows that a reliable source thought it worthy of comment that the subject said X. The problem is not verifiability, but ]: should we choose this fact out of millions of possible facts to mention in the article? To look at why an article does or does not say something, you need to look at the references.{{pb}}However, most Misplaced Pages articles are in need of huge overhauling for quality improvement, and one factor in this is a chronic shortage of volunteers, so I would make no assumptions that ] is in any sort of state to be emulated. — ] (''']''') 16:36, 23 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::I think my points have adhered to that difference. All of the Spencer statements I've posted have been through sources, such as the SPLC and Newsweek (I'm aware of WP:RSP on Newsweek), so sources obviously have found it worthy of comment. I agree that they are minority views based on the Misplaced Pages due weight principle, but that just has to do with the fact that he has received less fame in recent years, and major outlets are thus less likely to report on his statements nowadays. If we were to take a sample of articles out of the last few years, instead of basing it on everything ever said and written about him, you would probably find these new views to be represented in a large part of the articles. And to touch on Heimbach once again, I think we can all see the clear inconsistencies in the way that article is structured compared to this one, in regards to claims and personal identifications, which I found weird considering the similar nature of these two people. ] (]) 01:17, 24 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::So then we can say (say at the end of the lede) something like "but he has claimed to no longer be an active part of the art-right movement", but that is the best we can do. ] (]) 09:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I agree, I also think this article just lacks a lot of information about what he's been doing in recent years in general. There's very little after 2017 or so. I suggest a paragraph at the end of the lead along these lines: ''Spencer enjoyed the peak of his fame in 2017, having enjoyed a more laid-back lifestyle in the years following. He claims to no longer be an active part of the alt-right movement. He launched the web-based white nationalist publication Radix Journal in 2021, which holds many of the same viewpoints of the alt-right movement Spencer claims to have left.'' ] (]) 17:50, 24 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Content shouldn't go in the lead until it is part of the body, as the ], and nobody is stopping you from adding reliably sourced content to the body about ''Radix Journal'' (although we say in the article that the journal was founded in 2012 with ). In general, you should solve problems you find directly rather than starting discussion: this is the philosophy of "]". You will get ] often if you do this (reverts aren't meant as a personal slight), and ''then'' that's when discussion comes into it. — ] (''']''') 21:02, 26 August 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2022 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit semi-protected|Richard B. Spencer|answered=yes}} |
|
{{Edit semi-protected|Richard B. Spencer|answered=yes}} |
|
|
It must also be included that after endorsing joe biden, he also endorsed Kamala Harris. |
|
In the section titled Sines v. Kessler, Judge Norman K. Moon is noted as a federal magistrate judge. That is incorrect. Judge Moon is a district judge. Here is the relevant quote: "In June 2020, Norman K. Moon, the federal magistrate judge presiding over Sines v. Kessler ...". It should state, "In June 2020, Norman K. Moon, the federal district judge presiding over Sines v. Kessler ...". |
|
|
|
|
|
A small change but we want to give Judge Moon his due! ] (]) 01:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:I can't actually see where the source for this paragraph () mentions Moon at all, so the paragraph may need more sources anyway, and pruning of anything that is not ]. — ] (''']''') 13:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> . I have also reused a source for the first part of that sentence ] (]) 11:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== We should edit the short description to say "American neo-nazi." == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://nypost.com/2024/11/02/us-news/prominent-white-supremacist-richard-spencer-endorses-kamala-harris/ ] (]) 01:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
"Neo-nazi" is a more specific term since neo-nazis are white supremacists but with the addition of being anti-semetic, etc. It's kind of like how squares are rectangles and if something is a square the best description is "square" and not "rectangle." ] (]) 23:43, 18 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:] '''Not done''': it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a ] and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 01:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC) |
He says - rather convincingly in my view - that he is no longer a white nationalist and no longer associates with neo-Nazis, alt -right, etc. While of course we should not remove his scurrilous past of Nazi rhetoric, etc, I think per WP:BLP we should clarify in the opening paragraph that he has changed his views, or at least claims to have, rather than simply presenting him as a "neo-nazi, antisemitic conspiracy theorist, and white nationalist." NeverEnoughStan (talk) 03:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
I know it is only possible under very rare circumstances to use tweet citations to demonstrate the views of an individual due to Misplaced Pages policy on self-published sources (a policy that I´m not sure I entirely agree with, nevertheless it is still policy), anyways, the point being in relation to Russia/Ukraine that the tweet that demonstrated Spencer´s newfound support for NATO and Ukraine was taken off the section on his geopolitical views, which is fine in one regard that it complies with Misplaced Pages policy but it should be strongly emphasized that Spencer is no longer a supporter of Russia as anyone would believe from simply reading the article, so we should find a source to change this. StrongALPHA (talk) 08:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
It must also be included that after endorsing joe biden, he also endorsed Kamala Harris.
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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 01:45, 13 November 2024 (UTC)