Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:27, 26 March 2016

This page is not a forum for general discussion about White pride. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about White pride at the Reference desk.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the White pride article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Sociology Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology 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.

Discrimination Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination 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 importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the White pride article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Unsourced additions

Misplaced Pages articles are intended to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a subject. If you have material to add, it must cite reliable sources or it will be removed. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:58, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

The original text in the definition for white pride is completely inaccurate and biased. Although there is a facet to the term or slogan that is connected with hate speech and or white nationalist skin head gangs/organizations this aspect belongs in the controversy section.my only goal is to present a proper presentation which mirrors the definitions of black pride and Asian pride. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Commonsenceforanuncommonage (talk • contribs) 08:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

The fact is, "White Pride" is used primarily by a bunch of bigots as stated in the first sentence of the article. This is well established by many, many WP:RS. As a certifiable way-over-privileged "white guy", I wish to not be associated with this sh*t. The WP:WEIGHT is correct and the article should retain its criticism of "White Pride" Jim1138 (talk) 08:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Your opinions and Salon.com are not reliable sources. Have a look at the Black pride article and the vastly different tone there. It lists users of the phrase such as Black Panther Party without calling them racists (and they are). This is article is dripping with liberal, progressive, anti-white bias. Not even close to WP:NPOV Matty1487 (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Your opinion about salon.com is not a reliable source. Your stating they're not NPOV does not make them POV. Get consensus on a talk page before deleting sourced information. Ratemonth (talk) 22:56, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Official neutrality discussion

If anyone's wondering why IP's have been making a lot of changes on the article and lots of complaints on the talk page the past few days, it's because this picture has popped up on a lot of social media recently. Perhaps for WP:NEUTRALITY we should change the "evil nazi racists" tone on the article, and/or tone down the "positiveness" on the others? --Steverci (talk) 03:17, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Can we find reliable sources that are more positive about white pride? I think that trying to tone down the positiveness of the other two would not only be disruptive but would be likely to annoy the WMF Board. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I will restate my previous recommendation, deleted along with everything, that formal mediation might be in order about this article. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Seconded. Levonscott User talk:Levonscott User:Levonscott 10:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Certainly a reasonable position Robert, the mediation, but I don't think there's anything to mediate if no one can provide a source that documents this positive white pride.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Agree. If there are no positive sources, there is nothing or very little to mediate. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:53, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Lead edits discussion

I reverted Ylevental's edits to the lead (see ). Primarily because the lead sentence does not reflect the body of the article (per WP:LEADSENTENCE) and does not reflect reliable sources' definitions of white pride. Moreover, these major changes were done unilaterally and in the context of major POV editing on this page and black pride by the user and other editors after a social media post on Reddit was circulated (see WP:ANI#Vandalism_to_article). I'm starting discussion here as WP:BRD and a final good-faith effort to resolve conflict on this page. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC

@EvergreenFir: A summary of the changes that I did, and tell me which ones are notable: The lead states the obvious, that white pride encourages people to take pride in being white. The first source I added was from UC Berkeley http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/does_white_pride_lead_to_prejudice, titled "Does White Pride Lead to Prejudice?" The second source I added was http://www.inquisitr.com/2785751/black-pride-vs-white-pride-war-rages-define-black-power-positive-racial-prides-racist-hate-groups/ However, Dr. Janet E. Helms, founding director of Boston College’s Institute for the Study and Promotion of Race and Culture, writes “The task for whites is to develop a positive white identity based on reality not on assumed superiority... Not in the sense of Klan members’ ‘white pride’ but in the context of a commitment to a just society.” This quote can be found in multiple books too. Ylevental (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

It is obvious that a Guinea pig is a pig from Guinea. However, that is verifiably not the case.

That someone at UCB said whites have the task of developing white pride that is not in the sense of Klan members' 'white pride' suggests that Klan members' 'white pride' exists and the white pride that is different than that has not been developed. "We need to develop a use for coal that doesn't destroy the environment" implies the uses we have -- those that actually exist -- destroy the environment.

One side observation: Sometimes bold editing is needed to get discussion rolling on a stagnant topic. At the time of your edit, Ylevental, this topic was in no way stagnant. In such a case, it is easy for "bold" to be seen as part of the in-your-face ranting of the "but if reliable sources say positive things about 'X pride', we have to say positive things about 'Y pride'" crowd. If reliable sources say cherry pie is pie filled with cherry, we do not ignore the simple fact that a cow pie is neither a pie nor filled with cow. - SummerPhD 01:06, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Understood. So in this context, "White Pride" is a slogan, and Black pride is a movement. Ok, I re-added the inquisitr source within respect to the terminology.Ylevental (talk) 02:40, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Removal of Helms and American Renaissance cites

@I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc: I've reverted your recent removals. Please elaborate on your "context" criticism wrt Helms and why American Renaissance isn't sufficient in this context. James J. Lambden (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

American Renaissance (magazine) is a white supremacist publication. As such, it cannot be used as a reference without being couched as "white supremacist" and, further, should only be used when outside sources have noticed its commentary. jps (talk) 20:13, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc: Please stop edit warring and come discuss this. Also, it appears you called another editor a white supremacist, which is unacceptable.

The source is fine to use when referring to people's opinion pieces. We are not making statements in Misplaced Pages's voice; we are attributing the statements to the individuals. That they made those statements in a white supremacist publication is not the issue. The issue is whether or not those particular people's opinions are notable enough to be included. Nothing prevents us from citing a white supremacist source on a topic related to white supremacy so long as we attribute the statements to individuals. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:22, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

There is nothing close to appropriate couching of the claimed sources in the text. Nor is there any attempt being made here to understand that this magazine is basically unreliable. Why are you arguing for the inclusion of content sourced to white supremacist sources? It should only be done if others have noticed it. Full stop. jps (talk) 20:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The magazine is unreliable for general information. But we're citing opinion pieces, right? That's WP:SPS basically. Perhaps you should ask at WP:RSN? EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:26, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Attempting to compromise by mentioning the publication directly. See this edit. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:30, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Why should the opinions of a retired police officer matter at all? Or a journalist? This is a sociology question. At least the opinions of a clinical psychologist and founder of an institute make sense. jps (talk) 20:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Right now more than 10% of the article is content source exclusively to American Renaissance and there seems to be no notice of that content outside of other white supremacist sources. I don't think that this is a reasonable thing to do at this page at all. There are loads and loads of sources about white pride in the scholarly literature, many of which carefully explain the white supremacist position. I don't understand what the motivation is for keeping white supremacist sources in the article. jps (talk) 20:49, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir:, thank you. @I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc: White supremacist sources are perfectly reasonable for the beliefs and opinions of white supremacists, while scholarly literature is best for an analysis of those beliefs. I've restored the earlier summary of Helms. I'd prefer we negotiate changes here on the talk page than through reverts and re-reverts. James J. Lambden (talk) 20:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Your edit introduces a falsehood. Helms did not write anything in the book. She is quoted in the book. Please self-revert. jps (talk) 21:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The beliefs and opinions of white supremacists are not relevant to the academic study of this subject unless they are noticed by the scholars who study the subject. Since scholars have not taken note of the opinions of the retired police officer and the conservative journalist who believes that black people are less intelligent than white people, it is not Misplaced Pages's place to include those opinions that have not been noticed. They need to be removed until you can demonstrate that academic serious sources have paid attention to their claims. jps (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

My edit doesn't suggest Helms wrote anything in the book, as far as I can tell. The standard you propose for inclusion (that every claim and opunion must be noted by serious scholars) is not one I'm aware of. James J. Lambden (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Your edit reintroduces the wording: "As an alternative, Janet E. Helms, founding director of Boston College’s Institute for the Study and Promotion of Race and Culture writes..." No context. No mention of the book. Nothing. Fix it. jps (talk) 21:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The standard for inclusion is WP:RS and WP:WEIGHT/WP:FRINGE (and it doesn't get more fringe than active advocacy of white supremacy). If no one pays attention to a claim, we don't include it in Misplaced Pages. jps (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc: I believe your latest edit puts you past 3RR. Beyond that is unnecessarily WP:WEASEL. Please revert. As for context for Helms, I don't follow your argument - I introduce the "falsehood" that the quoted text comes from Helms' writing in the book by not mentioning the book? Would your objection be satisfied if we cited the Helms source directly? And please, there's no need for contentiousness, we all seem willing to compromise. James J. Lambden (talk) 21:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

(1)It's not possible to revert that edit (which you yourself reverted). I'm not sure why you think it is. (2) Helms didn't write the book. We cannot cite Helms directly because it is a quote from a personal communication with her in the book already cited (written by another person). Please try to keep up. jps (talk) 21:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

You're right that I linked the wrong diff - corrected now, please revert. So then how are you suggesting we improve the sourcing for Helms? And please mind WP:NPA. In case you're not aware this topic is subject to discretionary sanctions. James J. Lambden (talk) 21:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Is it so hard for you to look back in the history where you removed the wording you seek?

As an alternative, Janet E. Helms, founding director of Boston College’s Institute for the Study and Promotion of Race and Culture was quoted in the book "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together In The Cafeteria?": And Other Conversations About Race as saying that a white person "must become aware of his or her Whiteness, accept it as personally and socially significant... ... Not in the sense of Klan members’ ‘white pride’ but in the context of a commitment to a just society.”

As for your claim that my edit violates 3RR, I don't see how it is a revert. If you don't like the edit, explain why. WP:WEASEL is not an explanation unless you think "belief" is a weasel word.

jps (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

James J. Lambden - which discretionary sanctions are you referring to? I do not see any in the list of current sanctions that apply. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 23:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

American politics 2 applies, I believe. I'm stepping away for a bit until we can discuss without insults. EvergreenFir, please ping me if I'm needed, thanks. James J. Lambden (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay. I'm keeping my distance a bit. This page makes me so weary. Hoping someone else will join the discussion soon. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 23:18, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Reposting my comment from RSN:

• Not WP:RS -- should not be used. The citing to it on the opinions of people mentioned sounds like WP:OR, based on a WP:primary, questionable source and should be avoided. (I consider a white-supremacist magazine to be a primary source on white supremacy). If there's a reliable, secondary source that analyzed these quotes and came to similar conclusions, then I would support including it. Otherwise, it sounds like the opinions of people quoted are presented in Misplaced Pages's voice, and is problematic.

I believe the situation is similar to quoting Himmler verbatim in the SS article (from my list of Special mentions of various fringe content I've been finding in Misplaced Pages):

• Himmler is cited in Misplaced Pages's voice, beyond the pale: Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler stated, "Once the Führer himself has made a decision and given the order, it must be carried out, not only according to the word and the letter, but also in spirit."

Please also see a follow-up discussion on my Talk page: Misplaced Pages voice.

Hope this is helpful. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:16, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

K.e.coffman (talk) 17:03, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Political correctness

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I have requested that this page to be edited because of the following reason. Why is it that for people to say that Black power is not racist, how it is ok for Gay people to say Gay power, however it is RACIST when someone says that they are proud to be White and straight?

Mark Norville (talk) 18:06, 11 March 2016 (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. Cannolis (talk) 18:10, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2016

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at White pride. (edit · history · last · links · protection log) This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

This phrase is being completely misrepresented by this page. If white pride is a slogan used by racist groups to advance their racist agenda then so is black pride, Asian pride, ect. It is not the place of scholars to weigh in on the supposed rights and wrongs of society. This page was clearly written with an agenda clearly against white people and any type of positivity associated with them. I implore to you correct this injustice in the name of equal preservation of knowledge for all peoples 104.229.39.118 (talk) 04:17, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Follow-up to RSN

There was a big discussion, including at RSN, but AmRen is still here. I propose the following edit for the lead:

Currently:

• According to Joseph T. Roy of the Southern Poverty Law Center, white supremacists often circulate material on the internet and elsewhere that "portrays the groups not as haters, but as simple white pride civic groups concerned with social ills".

• Writing in the white supremacist magazine American Renaissance, Steve Sailer argues that white pride has a negative reputation because white people are expected to be at the top of the societal ladder, and that pride movements are associated with lack of social status. He says that this stigma affects blue-collar whites in particular. Retired police officer Justin J. Moritz also wrote in American Renaissance that he tried to trademark the phrase "White Pride Country Wide" but it was denied for being offensive, despite his belief that phrases like "Black Pride" and "Black Power" were trademarked.

Philosopher David Ingram argues that "affirming 'black pride' is not equivalent to affirming 'white pride,' since the former—unlike the latter...

Suggested change:

According to Joseph T. Roy of the Southern Poverty Law Center, white supremacists often circulate material on the internet and elsewhere that "portrays the groups not as haters, but as simple white pride civic groups concerned with social ills". Philosopher David Ingram argues that "affirming 'black pride' is not equivalent to affirming 'white pride,' since the former—unlike the latter

The original lead quotes from a WP:FRINGE source directly, which I don't think is appropriate.

Any objections? K.e.coffman (talk) 04:27, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

1. Roy, Joseph T. (September 14, 1999), Statement of Joseph T. Roy, Sr. before the Senate Judiciary Committee, U.S. Senate Committee on The Judiciary, archived from the original on 2008-05-20, retrieved 2015-01-21
2. Sailer, Steve. "White Pride is Uncool". American Renaissance. Retrieved 13 February 2016.
3. Moritz, Justin J. (August 3, 2005), "Feds Rule "White Pride" is "Offensive" and "Immoral"", American Renaissance, retrieved 2008-05-22.
4. Roy, Joseph T. (September 14, 1999), Statement of Joseph T. Roy, Sr. before the Senate Judiciary Committee, U.S. Senate Committee on The Judiciary, archived from the original on 2008-05-20, retrieved 2015-01-21

• Start-Class sociology articles
• Mid-importance sociology articles
• Start-Class Discrimination articles
• Mid-importance Discrimination articles
• WikiProject Discrimination articles
• Misplaced Pages semi-protected edit requests