Talk:Alt-lite

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 June 2017. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Conservatism Mid‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2021 and 29 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ButterKnifeMan (article contribs).

Merge

You can literally copy-paste this under a section in the alt-right article. --Aleccat 23:15, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, there is very little impact of the term "alt-lite" outside of "Alt-Right" circles. Allinallisallweallare19 (talk) 00:23, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

:Keep and expand, as well as move some content here from Alt-Right. This is recognized as a distinct movement from the alt-right, not just by people in these circles, but by civil rights organizations including the ADL. I have found a good number of sources on this and intend to try this over the next few days. See https://www.adl.org/news/press-releases/key-leaders-alt-right-vs-alt-lite DoctorPaveleer (talk) 19:58, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I now believe there is a case for this to be merged, but I think it would be necessary to work certain parts throughout the article, rather than simply copy-pasting it as a section alone. DoctorPaveleer (talk) 22:46, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand Two different ideologies, two different articles. Working "certain parts throughout the article" (of alt-right) would only conflate the two ideas even more. It's not really a trend on wikipedia to merge the articles of two rather different ideas. The mere fact that one's nomenclature is derived from the other isn't grounds enough for a merge. Also, "alt-lite" has now brought definition to a group of people who were before needlessly demonized under the "alt-right" banner – merging the two articles only acts to continue that process.--Tataryn (talk) 18:35, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand Really helped me to have a distinct article. Article is unclear is why I wrote. Makes it unclear at first which is which.MirandaWaiver (talk) 06:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)mirandawaiver[reply]

Merge. Firstly, from 2015-2016, the two movements were both under the 'alt-right' banner. Secondly, the term 'alt-lite' in the title of this article was created by hardline elements within the alt-right. Thirdly, media outlets continue to refer to figures that may be considered 'alt-lite' by the 'alt-right' (or 'new right' by themselves) as 'alt-right'. Fourthly, there are also many notable figures who toe the line between the two factions and cannot be easily defined into either. Due to the heavily blurred lines, this would be best merged as a section into 'alt-right' much as 'alt-left' currently is.--Jay942942 (talk) 02:16, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalism

The alt-lite aren't "civic nationalists"; they are lite ethnic nationalists (hence, the term "alt lite"). Read the article on ethnic nationalism — it sounds nothing like the alt-lite, who may not explicitly support an exclusionary ethnostate, but support xenophobic and racist policies to preserve the white majority. Benjamin5152414 (talk) 21:09, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

James Q. Wilson textbook

Regarding this edit, the 15th edition was in 2016, and the 16th lists 2019 as a publication date. The cited link has 2018 which suggests error or laziness. The 16th is searchable through google books and doesn't mention "alt-right", much less "alt-lite" (or "alt-light"). If this was the older edition, it is extremely unlikely this introductory textbook would go into detail of the term in 2015, when the 2016 edition was being prepared. The granular nature of the attached information is suspect, as well, so I have reverted to a previous version before that source was added, with some streamlining.

Likewise this edit removed material cited to a book written in 1996. This is very obviously WP:SYNTH. Sources need to be about the "alt-light" or else they're basically useless for this article. Grayfell (talk) 08:39, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Chapman NZ vs Kyle Chapman USA

"conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec, New Zealand activist Kyle Chapman, Kyle Prescott, conservative"

Kyle Chapman (born 27 April 1971)[citation needed] is a New Zealand political activist, the former national director of the New Zealand National Front (NZNF), a white nationalist political party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyle_Chapman

Not to be confused with Kyle Chapman aka 'Based Stickman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon says eat (talk • contribs) 12:34, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reification fallacy and etymology section

It is by no means certain that one can properly refer to those associated with the Alt-lite aggregation as a movement. If we regard a movement as "a group of people working together to advance their shared political, social, or artistic ideas," it is doubtful they form any kind of coherent movement. We see in the etymology section that they are people Richard Spencer would like to purge from his Alt-right movement though he assumed the Free-Speech people were, in fact, his people. We further understand that the Alt-lite are people whom some associate with the Alt-right for political reasons which makes the term a simple pejorative label because of the racism of Spencer. This etymology section is inadequate.Ariel31459 (talk) 14:53, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Replace Milo Yiannopoulos in the composite picture?

He hasn't been relevant to anything since 2017 after CPAC. Maybe a better example would be more suitable, especially considering what's come out about him since then and his close ties to actual Neo-Nazis. פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 01:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- @פֿינצטערניש: Who should replace him and why? Dronebogus (talk) 22:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]