Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:50, 24 September 2008

Biography Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Illinois Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Useless article

Other than a vague reference to "voting for social justice" there isn't a single word in this article about what Saul Alinsky's actual political beliefs were. Shouldn't an article about a person famous as an ideological leader be devoted mostly to his ideology, and not to irrelevant crap like a long list of people who may or may not agree with whatever it is Saul Alinsky taught (and what that was, one could not say from this article)?RockinRobbin 17:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Alinsky is regarded more for his methods than his particular policy positions. His notability rises from his techniques of community and grassroots organization -- lessons it could be argued have been applied by Democrats and Republicans alike, particularly in Karl Rove's "get out the base" push in the past two presidential elections. See this article: . --208.58.3.202 16:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

This article in not useless. Saul Alinsky founded the field of community organizing and has had a profound effect on organizing methods in America. The influence of his teachings is notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Biography?

There is no biography. 202.149.24.248 (talk) 16:42, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Fixed as of 21 Sep 2008. The article now has more biographical information, references, and links to the early childhood and background of Alinsky and his work, writings, and contributions to the field of organizing for power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 18:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Cause of Death?

Does anyone know how or why Alinsky died? Seems like it happened very soon after he published Rules for Radicals. Don't know that it is relevant to the article, but I am curious.--Chinawhitecotton 08:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC) smoking

Alinsky died of a heart attack at the age of 63 on June 12, 1972. AletaP 14:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

My father died of a Coronary Thrombosis on the morning of June 12, 1972 as he was leaving the dry cleaner's in Carmel, CA. It was a natural event.

Alinsky was a fascinating individual. This article should be far better than it is. Consult his 1971 Playboy interview for great insights into the man and his work. George415 01:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree about the Playboy interview. It is a good read. Here is a link to it: http://www.progress.org/2003/alinsky2.htm for those interested. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 19:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course we can't know for sure if it was natural. The CIA developed assassination guns that shot a tiny frozen splinter of poison into the body. The tiny entrance wound would be virtually undetectable, and the cause of death would be heart attack (coronary thrombosis). Supposedly the poisions used would break down soon after death, and thus be undetectable. 71.221.89.250 00:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

A ridiculous conspiracy theory and pure speculation by the above poster. He died of natural causes to my knowledge. I will try to find the exact cause and if appropriate, add it. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright

I was very pleased to see an image of Alinksy in the article. However, according to the copyright tag:

It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of book covers to illustrate the book in question on the English-language Misplaced Pages, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law.

The guidelines are quite specific that fair use 'covers the book in question'. Isn't this a guideline violation? One may disagree with United States copyright law, but shouldn't we show some respect for Misplaced Pages's copyright guidelines, and some understanding of their legal situation? Potentially, any single copyright violation could cause an entire encylopedia distribution to be subject to legal action - Crosbiesmith 23:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

So what exactly is your complaint? Deyyaz 13:53, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

This image is, in addition to that use, being use to illustrate the subject of this article. That also falls under "Fair Use". So, no conflict. --NightMonkey 06:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

ANY image can be used by Misplaced Pages under Fair Use, copyrighted or not. Misplaced Pages is educational and non-profit. Full stop.

It's completely false to suggest that educational or nonprofit uses are not subject to the copyright laws. The copyright laws apply whether you're educating or not, whether you're trying to make a profit or not. (Full stop indeed.)

His pictures and images are widely used and reprinted without any attribution of the ultimate source in many public articles. Personally I think many of the above comments are over reactions to use of a picture now widely in the public domain and used in many places in articles about him. I don't know why a picture of him cannot be uploaded. Does anyone know how to find a picture in the public domain of him and upload it. I see no serious objections to doing so. It is done in many other articles. If so, would you please do so. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 18:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Dedication of "Rules for Radicals"

A user has been editing the page to say that "Rules for Radicals" was dedicated to Lucifer. This is not true. Please give a citation if you're going to make such claims. The book is dedicated to "Irene."

71.221.89.250 05:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

On the following page there is a jesting reference to "Lucifer," but to call this a dedication is to take it entirely out of context. Alinsky was known to be a character, even once suggesting a rally where everyone ate lots of baked beans and went into an Opera House for the rich. He called it a "fart-in." Although some might call this "confrontational," it's actually quite funny. Laughter has quite a cleansing effect on the soul. On the same page with the Lucifer jest there are also quotes from Thomas Paine and Rabbi Hillel.

71.221.89.250 22:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Here is the quote from the book:

Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins -- or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom -- Lucifer.

It doesn't seem to be a jest as suggested above. The comment that laughter has a cleansing effect on the soul sounds like an attempt to change the topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.255.165 (talk) 09:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

This has been addressed by pointing out the comment about Lucifer was not as dedicating the book to Lucifer. His book was dedicated to Irene. But the comment was made by Alinsky as an epigraph in the front matter of his book Rules for Radicals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs)

Alinsky is being misrepresented

The article states that Alinsky "encouraged controversy and conflict, often to the dismay of middle-class activists who otherwise would sponsor his activism." This is an utter distortion, and indeed the citation given to support this claim actually supports the opposite:

"There's another reason for working inside the system. Dostoevsky said that taking a new step is what people fear most. Any revolutionary change must be preceded by a passive, affirmative, non-challenging attitude toward change among the mass of our people. They must feel so frustrated, so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are willing to let go of the past and chance the future. This acceptance is the reformation essential to any revolution. To bring on this reformation requires that the organizer work inside the system, among not only the middle class but the 40 per cent of American families - more than seventy million people - whose income range from $5,000 to $10,000 a year (in 1971). They cannot be dismissed by labeling them blue collar or hard hat. They will not continue to be relatively passive and slightly challenging. If we fail to communicate with them, if we don't encourage them to form alliances with us, they will move to the right. Maybe they will anyway, but let's not let it happen by default."

Perhaps the same folks claiming that "Rules for Radicals" was dedicated to Lucifer are involved in this?

71.221.89.250 02:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

This has been addressed by pointing out the comment about Lucifer was not as dedicating the book to Lucifer. It was dedicated to Irene. But the comment was made by Alinsky as an epigraph in the front matter of his book Rules for Radicals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Who cares if Clinton wrote a thesis on Alinsky?

This is immaterial to the article.

71.221.89.250 02:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that it is interesting and notable. I added a line and cite on the Hillary Clinton page. There is some speculation that her work and writing about Alinksy may (or may not) have affected her subsequent political journey. As she is a US senator and candidate for US President, I think it is notable and worth keeping.Kevinp2 17:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I still don't think it belongs in an article on Alinsky. It does indeed belong in the Clinton article, but she was not a student of Alinsky. She simply wrote an undergraduate thesis on his work. She never worked at the IAF, either, as noted below. I don't think the fact that she is running for president justifies including this in the article, unless in the context of a larger section on prominent figures who studied Alinsky's work, which would be a separate and much larger section from "Students of Alinsky." To qualify as a "Student of Alinsky," she would have had to have taken his teachings to heart. Even in her thesis she was critical of his philosophy, and she only seems to have continuously diverged from it afterward.

CelestialDog 20:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hillary choosing Alinsky to write about for a college thesis demonstrates the importance and influence of Alinksy on the field or organizing for power, especially community organizing of community churches and the like for political action and social revolution. Alinsky has influenced several very prominent political leaders to varying degrees. But Obama mastered Alinsky's techniques as demonstrated in his using such tactics to easily defeat Hillary in caucus type elections where the Alinsky community organizing rules and tactics for political power are most effective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 03:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Clinton never a student at IAF

Removed Clinton from list of students at IAF. She was offered a job, turned it down to attend law school. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17388372/page/3/

Saul Alinsky is a mentor of Hillary Clinton. The book Rules for Radicals, is the play book for Hillary on how to turn America into a Socialist society. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agrmatt2 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Obama was hired by and worked for Gerald/Jerry Kellman in South Chicago, an ideological disciple of Alinsky. Obama learned the Alinsky methods and ultimately mastered Alinsky's techniques by becoming an instructor of Alinsky methods of organizing, and as demonstrated in his using such tactics to easily defeat Hillary in caucus type elections where the Alinsky community organizing rules and tactics for political power are most effective. Obama's ground game based on the Alinsky method was far superior to Hillary's in the caucus type elections. Hillary was influenced by Alinsky's teachings (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152.html) and may have used Alinsky techniques from time to time in her elections but never mastered them to the level that Obama has. Obama not only mastered them, but he instructed other community organizers in the rules and tactics developed by Alinsky and codified in Alinsky's book Rules for Radicals. See this link for summary of Alinsky's rules for mass organizing for power: http://www.semcosh.org/AlinskyTactics.htm See the quote from Alinsky's son reprinted in an IVD editorial as to how well Alinsky's son thought Obama has learned the Alinsky method of mass organizing for power: http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=306457496204115 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

extended quote

I am not sure of the need for the extended quote.

Also, is this quote from Rules or Reville? It is credited to Reville but dated for Rules. Just wondering.

Cm1165 01:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)cm1165

The long quote originated from the fact that a citation was being given to support a claim, when the citation actually supported the opposite. We could whittle down the quote a bit, but I think it is helpful for understanding Alinsky's philosophy of truly democratic organizing and open, non-hostile communication between groups to develop a true democracy - a philosophy that Hillary Clinton rejected in her thesis, by the way, choosing the path of elitism. I know that's off topic for this question :)

71.221.89.250 21:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

NPOV never forever

Howdy. I see that user User:Abarry slapped the NPOV tag on this article back on 2/26, without listing specific objections or goals for improvement. NPOV cannot be used to just slag an article forever. It exists to assist (and insist) that editors fix the article, because the person applying the tag is either too lazy to fix it themselves, or is being prevented from fixing it by other agressive editors. The NPOV tag should not be idly applied to an article without other methods being attempted to fix the problem.

I'm going to remove the tag. If it is re-applied, it must be re-applied with specific references to sections or form which violates the NPOV policy. I'm not saying that this article doesn't deserve this tag, but it has to be applied fairly and with specifics on what the tagger expects to see fixed to be able to remove the tag. Cheers! --NightMonkey 20:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Totally agree. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 19:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Birth and Upbringing

The article contains nothing of his early life. Were his parents rich, poor, or middle class? What was his educational background? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juntoboys (talk • contribs) 08:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

A sentence and link to a reference about his parents being Russian Jewish immigrants has been added. The ultimate source is his book Reveille for Radicals. See this link for more information on Alinsky's parents and his early childhood: http://www.uubedford.org/sermons/alinsky.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs)

This article needs more info

I am not an expert on Saul Alinsky, but this article makes it sound like all he did was be a community organizer encouraging people to register to vote. I believe there was more to him then that to be explained or defended . Here is a quote from Time Magazine from 1970: Referenced here:

In his view, the end of achieving power justifies a range of means...If the occasion requires, Alinsky’s forces will not refrain from spreading rumors about an antagonist or indulging in something that comes very close to blackmail.

There is also mention that Alinsky believed that he needed to create an "enemy" in order to translate community interest into community action.

The fact that this article is so short on specifics makes me believe that those who know about him are hiding details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.255.165 (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

More specifics have been added about Alinsky's 'rules' and tactics. See this link for example: http://www.semcosh.org/AlinskyTactics.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 03:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposed edit

I take umbrage with the following line:

(made famous by Upton Sinclair's novel The Jungle on the allegedly horrific working conditions in the Union Stock Yards)

First of all, it was not made famous, but rather, infamous. This constitutes a misuse of the English language. Second of all, using allegedly as an adjective for horrific working conditions in the Union Stock Yards is utterly outrageous. It is analogous to saying that the Jewish Holocaust was allegedly deleterious to Jewish culture in Europe. It's pure B.S., plain and simple. Just as the Jewish Holocaust did occur, the "working conditions in the Union Stock Yards..." were truly horrific.
Unless someone objects, I'm going to change the line to:

(made infamous by Upton Sinclair's novel The Jungle on the allegedly horrific working conditions in the Union Stock Yards) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbahn (talk • contribs) 10:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Given that Sinclair's The Jungle is a novel, aka a work of FICTION, it's both offensive to compare it to the Holocaust, and inappropriate in terms of Misplaced Pages policy to act as if its claims cannot be questioned. DarthSquidward (talk) 15:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

NPOV Check

This article contains a lot of bias, specifically against Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic Candidate, and Senator Hillary Clinton. It also seems that a number of references are to controversial sources such as Jerrome Corsi who has had much criticism in the past for his misinformation. It does seem from the above conversation that the article as a whole is questionable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by N@vi (talk • contribs) 05:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not seeing Obama mentioned very much, and I don't see anything non-factual or critical. Please elaborate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.58.249.133 (talk) 18:00, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

This article is not biased and reflects who Alinsky was, his teachings, his writings, and his tremendous influence on the field of organizing in general in American labor, communities, and politics, and especially in the new field of community organizing of community churches and the like for political action. Community organizing is a field of organizing which Alinsky basically created, perfected, and codified. Any bias attributed in reading this article is likely in the mind of the person who put this article on NPOV because they would prefer to hide the influence of Alinsky's teachings on Obama and his early career in South Chicago as a community organizer working for organizations of the Alinsky school of community organizing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

"Father of community organizing" and "American Jew" category

I changed both of these and then they were changed back. I am not saying that he wasn't the father of community organizing. It is just that, to my taste anyway, an encyclopedia should use literal wording. I think it would be better to say something like: He was one of the most important and influential early community organizers, rather than use the metaphor "father." On the second issue, the article does not say he was Jewish. Therefore he does not seem to be defined as an American Jew. Just mention his Jewish identity in the article and then I would have no objection to giving him the category. Thanks. Northwestgnome (talk) 17:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I see that his Jewish parentage is mentioned. Sorry if I missed it before. (I still think the category could be questioned unless he considered his Jewishness important. I don't know if he did or not.) Northwestgnome (talk) 17:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

A sentence and link to a reference about his parents being Russian Jewish immigrants has been added. The ultimate source is his book Reveille for Radicals. See this link for more information on Alinsky's parents and his early childhood: http://www.uubedford.org/sermons/alinsky.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I have changed the word father to founder. He created the field of community organizing as we know it today. I think the use of father in this context is perfectly OK. But the word founder works just as well and accommodates the objections to using the word father in this context. As I said previously, I have added a sentence and reference to his being the son of Russian Jewish immigrants. I think I have addressed all your objections via these changes.

Yes. Thanks. No problem now. I kind of knew he was Jewish from both his first and last name. :-) Northwestgnome (talk) 19:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Lucifer quote

I would rather see some discussion of what he really believed than the sneaky, backdoor mention of this hard to pin down the context and intention of quote. Northwestgnome (talk) 17:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

It was an epigraph in his book Rules for Radicals. See: http://www.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?6acfde0577.jpg . It is included in the article about Alinsky to illustrates his well known dark and irreverent sense of humor. Another example in his writings are his darker, irreverent, and to him humorous idea to use flatulation tactics to disrupt the operas and theaters attended by the "haves". It think it is very fair to include this epigraph from his major book. After all Alinsky thought it was important enough to put it there. It shows a side of Alinsky worth briefly mentioning. Some say he dedicated his book to Lucifer. He did not. He dedicated it to Irene. But he did enjoy and relish the analogy of being a rebel and using an agitating style of community organizing, and Lucifer as the very first example of same in his words. I will add the word irreverent to the paragraph. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Obama Nation

I don't think the book Obama Nation should be considered a reliable source. Please check out its article. Northwestgnome (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

That you do not think Obama Nation is a reliable source is a matter of your opinion. I have read it and other books about Obama and of course the subject of this article, Alinsky. Obama Nation was a number one best seller in the NY Times list for many weeks. While some small number of specific items in it have been technically wrong such as Obama's marriage date, most of the other information regarding Obama's relationship with the Alinsky school and Alinsky disciples of South Chicago has held up since it is heavily sourced. The book of course has been bad mouthed by the left and praised by the right. It is a source for information for some material in this article as to the influence of Alinsky's teachings and writings and disciples such as Gerald/Jerry Kellman had on Obama, but very little of The Obama Nation is used in this article (just one link) and those facts are also backed by crossed references to other sources for the same facts. It think this article is very unbiased toward any prominent political leader who has been influenced by Olinsky. Obama is actually mentioned very little in this article. But to leave of an Alinsky school organizer who has now risen to be nominated to be President of the USA would be a discredit to the legacy of Alinsky. Someone in the media in the current political environment should ask Obama directly if he was influenced as a community organizer by Alinsky's teachings and writings. It would be interesting to watch his answer. Obama himself said his years as a community organizer in South Chicago was the best education he ever had. But he seems to avoid mentioning Alinsky's name. Just like now he avoids discussing the Rev. Wright. He disassociates himself from anyone in his past who he now finds to be for whatever reason to be potentially embarrassing to his political aspirations. Hower, Alinsky himself would be proud to see how far and fast Obama has gone from his days as a community organizer in South Chicago. Alinsky was raised Jewish but was an athiest in his adult life, as I recall. But I would like to think he is up there looking down with a big smile as he watches Obama "community organize" on a massive and national scale to try to win the highest office in the land. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtngoat63 (talk • contribs) 03:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the paragraph about Obama being skilled in the "Alinsky Method" as being incoherent and poorly sourced. Obama Nation is not a reliable source about Obama for certain. The other sources are Obama's own piece (which does not say he is skilled or call the Alinsky Method a proper noun to be distinguished in this way), a blog, and an article that says that Obama was influenced by Alinsky's methods. All of this is a rather odd thesis that is not terribly well supported. At best one can say there is an ideological or practical lineage. But calling Obama an Alinsky-ite seems to be a stretch. I am also concerned with the POV aspect because saying bad things about Alinsky and community organizing, then tying Obama to them, has become a minor talking point in anti-Obama circles having to do with the presidential campaign. We ought to be on the lookout for that. Wikidemon (talk) 23:54, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

An editor who seems to be camping out here has reverted the change, citing a reason that is basically a personal attack. Based on the editor's contributions on this subject at The Obama Nation's article and talk pages it is pretty clear this new WP:SPA is not editing with much awareness of our content or behavior standards. They have been adding poorly written, poorly sourced material to both. We should probably review all of his/her contributions in the past few weeks for bias, sourcing, and quality. Wikidemon (talk) 00:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

These two reversions are simply personal attacks accusing me of "bad faith" and "vandalism." This is a tendentious WP:SPA who seems to be reading policies for buzz words to use against other editors, and parroting warnings given him/her about disruptive behavior. There is no retrivution intended - I have simply spotted a problem editor who has made single-purpose disruptive contributions to several related articles, as explained above. I have explained why they do not belong in the encyclopedia, above. In the first case there is no demonstration at all that Jerry Kellman is a "prominent national leader" or even notable (he does not seem to be), so he is poorly sourced. In the second, I see no reliable sources that Obama was a "skilled practitioner" in the "Obama Method" - that seems made up. No reliable sources were cited for the proposition, and when I google the subject all I get are occasional anti-Obama blogs and editorials. This all seems like a WP:COATRACK against Obama. If any editor wants to include the disputed material they ought to discuss it here rather than edit war. 01:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Note for the record - I am at 3RR on this, which I consider a reasonable alternative to dispute resolution given the patterns of the editor I am dealing with. However, I am aware of 3RR limits and will not further revert on this. If this editor persists in this article or elsewhere we probably have a behavior problem we will have to deal with through administrative remedy. We have tried without success to educate the person about content and behavior policies, and I do not see any likelihood of a productive dispute resolution. - Wikidemon (talk) 01:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wordpress is not a reliable source

This should go without saying, but just a reminder to anyone and everyone involved in editing this and other contentious articles: Opinion blogs and editorials are only considered reliable sources for the opinions of their authors, not for statements of fact about their subjects. Thank you. --GoodDamon 02:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

And neither is "freeimagehost"

Pictures can be photoshopped and faked. A massive number of the citations in this article are to photographs stored at an image hosting site, and should be removed post-haste. Rather than piece-meal remove them and sift through the large amount of additions made by a particular single-purpose account primarily responsible for the introduction of poorly-sourced content to this article, I propose the article be reverted to an agreed-upon revision prior to those edits. For various reasons, I will not make that change myself, at least not immediately. Rather, I would like to gain consensus on such a reversion first. And if such consensus cannot be reached, I would appeal to the community to provide rationale for the use of poor cites such as the images in question. If no one responds here, I will lodge a formal RfC. --GoodDamon 15:30, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

GoodDamon and buddy WikiDemon and others are on a mission to wreck this page. How neutral and fair you are as one editor in Misplaced Pages. So you now think you OWN Misplaced Pages and its rules and what can be written about Alinsky. And again you are using intimidation ignoring what you did. You removed an entire paragaph about Gerald Kellman hiring Obama and Obama's success working for Alinsky spawned organizations in South Chicago. You could have deleted some references and left the rest. But you deleted it all. See the Wiki rules and the warning you got from Wike about that when you or WikiDemon filed the complaint about me which then got you blocked too for doing such things and thus encouraging edit warring. The paragraph cited the Washington Post story for Gerald Kellman hiring Obama and also cited how skilled Obama became as a community organizer, a job and job title that Alinsky pioneered. It also literally mentions the "Alinsky method" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152_4.html . You obviously did not read the article and are shooting from the lip. See page 4 and page 1, if you choose again not to read the referenced article. You have obviously not read the article and are objecting to my paragraph on the influence of Alinsky method for personal biased reasons, imo. The person who put you on block told you that. You could have deleted just the references you didn't like, but the Washington Post reference and article supports all statements made in the paragraph all by itself. It was not quoting the Washington Post. It is a paragraph summarizing the article in the Washington post about Alinsky's influences on Barack Obama, a candidate for the USA. Keep it up. You in effect reported yourself the last time by your actions. I guess I will have to file a report about you and your other so called neutral buddies that you are trying to OWN the Alinsky article and hide the impact of Alinsky's ideology on modern, prominent politics and leaders in the country. Alinsky would be proud that he has two people who studied his ideology, tactics, and methods and became candidates for the Presidency of the USA. You apparently wish to hide it for you own personal reasons. You and your buddy WikiDemon, etc., who descended on the Saul Alinsky page are not neutral and objective editors. You are on a mission. It is obvious. --Mtngoat63 (talk) 15:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

RfC: Addition of poorly-sourced material for use as citations

Template:RFCbio Should the article be reverted to a revision prior to the widespread introduction of blogs and images at an image hosting site as citations for claims about the article's subject in relation to Barack Obama and others? --GoodDamon 15:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

All such disputed links have been removed by GoodDamon and crowd already. The Washington Post article supports the disputed paragraph all by itself. It literally mentions the "Alinsky method" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152_4.html GoodDamon and buddy WikiDemon and others are on a mission to wreck the this page and scrub it to serve their mission. How neutral and fair you are as one editor in Misplaced Pages. So you now think you OWN Misplaced Pages and its rules and what can be written about Alinsky. And again you are using intimidation ignoring what you did. You removed an entire paragaph about Gerald Kellman hiring Obama and Obama's success working for Alinsky spawned organizations in South Chicago. You could have deleted some references and left the rest. But you deleted it all. See the Wiki rules and the warning you got from Wike about that when you or WikiDemon filed the complaint about me which then got you blocked too for doing such things and thus encouraging edit warring. The paragraph cited the Washington Post story for Gerald Kellman hiring Obama and also cited how skilled Obama became as a community organizer, a job and job title that Alinsky pioneered. It also literally mentions the "Alinsky method" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/24/AR2007032401152_4.html . You obviously did not read the article and are shooting from the lip. See page 4 and page 1, if you choose again not to read the referenced article. You have obviously not read the article and are objecting to my paragraph on the influence of Alinsky method for personal biased reasons, imo. The person who put you on block told you that. You could have deleted just the references you didn't like, but the Washington Post reference and article supports all statements made in the paragraph all by itself. It was not quoting the Washington Post. It is a paragraph summarizing the article in the Washington post about Alinsky's influences on Barack Obama, a candidate for the USA. Keep it up. You in effect reported yourself the last time by your actions. I guess I will have to file a report about you and your other so called neutral buddies that you are trying to OWN the Alinsky article and hide the impact of Alinsky's ideology on modern, prominent politics and leaders in the country. Alinsky would be proud that he has two people who studied his ideology, tactics, and methods and became candidates for the Presidency of the USA. You apparently wish to hide it for you own personal reasons. You and your buddy WikiDemon, etc., who descended on the Saul Alinsky page are not neutral and objective editors. You are on a mission. It is obvious.--Mtngoat63 (talk) 15:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

• Unassessed biography articles
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs of people
• WikiProject Biography articles
• Start-Class WikiProject Illinois articles
• Low-importance WikiProject Illinois articles
• Start-Class Chicago articles
• Mid-importance Chicago articles
• WikiProject Chicago articles