Jump to content

Talk:American Freedom Party/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

over-"protected"?

why is this article STILL "protected from ANY edits by non-admins?

semi-protected (registered-"established" users), might be acceptable, but this article has been admin only SINE JUNE 2012, & that seems a bit excessive.

it also seems more than moderately unreasonable, that the TALK PAGE is semi-protected?

why on earth does someone need to be a registered user to comment on the talkpage!?

when i came here, all i wanted to do was add (to the infobox) that the party's affiliations/ideology includes "white christianity" (self-identified as such by the party & various members); which should have taken me about 5 seconds of editing-time.

instead i'm wasting time on the article's talkpage (& lucky to be "allowed" to do so, apparently)

p

Lx 121 (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

That's all because party members and various individuals from Stormfront were continuously vandalizing the article and soapboxing on the talk page. That was very disruptive and wasted a lot of our time and energy. So the preotections are not unreasonable.
As for your suggested edit, it's unacceptable because what the party and its members say about themselves is irrelevant. They are not a credible source of information about themselves per our policies and guidelines. Any information on them has to come from reliable independent sources, as outlined in our policies here: WP:V and WP:RS. Hope that helps. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 02:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)


well, i want to be clear on the record that i don;t agree with making 'locking' the article so that it's "admins-only' that violates the whole purpose of WIKIpedia. i also object to 'restricting' the talk page; the whole point of talkpages is to allow open discussion; if a user violates the rule & needs to be blocked, then do so.
as regards the "white christian" status of the party, i'm sorry but in this case, that is suprious reasoning:
if a POLITICAL PARTY self-identifies with a particular ideology or religion, on the record, then that constitutes a part of the description of that party's ideological make-up/affiliation. & it also constitutes a verifiable fact. if other members of the given ideology or religion object to said party's affilitaion, or if the party's demonstrated actions (and/or other stated ideologies) contradict the stated association, then that should also be noted on the record.
as i am not aware of any specific "white christian" group that objects to this party affiliating itself with "white christianity" 'in general', & as i am not aware of the party's having acted in contradiction of broadly generalized "white christian" principles, i think we're on safe ground in listing "white christianity" among the party's ideologies in the infobox, as they in fact claim to be such.
Lx 121 (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I can't help you with the protection. I'm not an admin. And this isn't the right place to discuss it anyway. As for the party, the materials they publish are not reliable sources because they are unduly self-serving, and because their self-description is radically at odds with how they are described in reliable independent sources, which never descibe them as white Christian. See WP:SELFPUB and WP:REDFLAG. Read this article talk page and archives to orient yourself what's been going on. Good luck! Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 04:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

FAQ

I have created an FAQ page for this article (see above) and added it to my watchlist. Everyone should feel welcome to contribute to it, and I hope it can help us to avoid further disputes in the vicinity of this article. Evanh2008 (talk|contribs) 14:44, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Attempted edit 4/14/2013

I have in good faith tried to edit this article, but it was allegedly "biased". I wrote the allegations in the same fashion as the Golden Dawn (Greece) is written. This is apparently "biased": "It has been alleged by its critics which include the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the media that the organization promotes white supremacy." I also included disputed by party regarding white supremacy in the ideology box. The person who reverted these edits has a hidden political agenda and might be a JIDF agent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Friedrich465 (talk • contribs) 05:28, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

No, you are removing WP:CITEd material and adding your own biased WP:POV. It does not matter what the article on Golden Dawn says about the golden dawn, this is an article about the AFP, all material included must be cited, to reliable sources, and relate to this subject. Heiro 05:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

You are either lying or failed to pay attention to my edits. I did not removed any cited material or sources. I reworded the article. All I did was reword the article in a NPOV, as the organization itself denies the allegations. In the same fashion, that the Golden Dawn denies the neo-Nazism allegation. Yet, I don't see people reverting the same wordings which is simply that the party itself disputes the claim. You falsely claim that I'm trying to insert my own "bias", when you won't even let anyone assert that the party disputes the allegations. But, this article according to you should be written with your own bias. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Jewish Internet Defense League? Friedrich465 (talk) 05:47, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

You added material that was not cited to reliable sources, in the GD article the denials are cited. Find sources to reliable news outlets. And keep your assumptions about political affiliation to yourself. No one here is a member of the JDIF nor are we editing proxies for them. We just take a hard line against letting neonazis WP:POV skew articles here. Heiro 05:57, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I would like to apologize for my JIDF accusation. Also, I'm not a neo-Nazi. I'm Polish-American. If someone would be kind to write into the article that the party itself denies the allegation I will appreciate it.

Here are the sources I managed to dig up:

  • Press TV interview where Merlin C. Miller deny the racist label:

"Now these [are] conservative platforms; we are not racist. Now there may be some white nationalists involved in these movements as you find in any movement but our position is strictly based on what is best for the American people and it is not racist."

Also, the party denying the "slurs" on it official website:

Also, here are the articles of the SPLC and ADL regarding their white supremacist views.

Friedrich465 (talk) 06:17, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Go read up on our policies, WP:SELFPUBLISH blogs, facebook, myspace and youtube videos are not considered reliable sources here. Heiro 06:27, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, here is the article on the Press TV official website:

Nothing we can use there. It's just a bunch of unduly self-serving statements by Miller in an interview in an anti-zionist news outlet. No good reason to lend any credibility to them, per WP:ABOUTSELF. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 07:15, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Considering we have now had 2 new one edit WP:SPAs pop in as many days(the above and User:Contrabanditor), maybe this [ttp://en.metapedia.org/m/index.php?title=Examples_of_censorship_and_propaganda_in_Wikipedia&action=historysubmit&diff=282819&oldid=239015 has something to do with it]? Add the "h" tpo make link work, apparently the white supremacist encyclopedia is on our blacklist, lolHeiro 03:38, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I think User:Polarscribe made a good compromise. I'm not aware of what User:Heironymous is referring to that they think brought me here. I noticed the incorrect/ambiguous label on the article after reading people refer to my comments elsewhere about following a 'White Supremacist' party, who were citing the Wikipedia article. Contrabanditor (talk) 03:58, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Please discuss here, Contrabanditor

If you wish to change the longstanding consensus re: describing this party as espousing white supremacism, please discuss here. polarscribe (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

They are currently at 4rr on this and have been notified here. Heiro 03:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
See thread here Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Occidental Observer. Heiro 05:17, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I removed the souce and the material cited to it. It was a letter by a party board member, and the claim was unduly self-serving and contradicted reliable sources, as the letter writer himself admitted. Fails WP:ABOUTSELF and WP:EXCEPTIONAL. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 10:01, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
I also cleaned up the article to remove unduly self-serving self-descrition from SPS's per WP:MISSION. Also removed a particularly egregious BLP violation. The source provided did not support the contention to the extent required by WP:BLP. It just reported what the party website said, and the party website is not a reliable source for information on third parties. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 13:25, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Not all of us

Not all of us IP editors came from Stormfront or similar organizations, so I'd appreciate it if my edits were not removed under the lie of "racist screed" or "nazi rantings" as Beyond My Ken and Heironymous Rowe are noting. I'm going to re-post my deleted edits:

Its YOUR opinions that "White Nationalism is code wording for white supremacist". Of course nobody here can cite sources (NOT ideologically-opposed groups like the ADL or SPLC) that state this. Here's once source to educate.

I don't see how you editors are even permitted to continue this debate. ALL of your points are nothing but POV, biased viewpoints. Even when there's sources (1) (2) right in front of your face that show A3P to be White Nationalist and not supremacist, you still continue to claim nationalist = supremacist. You've no idea on the different tenets that encompass the far-right. 65.214.33.188 (talk) 13:37, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Here's an emphasis, in case sight past the nose is not obtainable. 65.214.33.188 (talk) 13:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

White nationalists don't admit they are white supremacists; but reading the laundry list of antisemites and ex-Nazis that leads the Party, we cannot cloak the reality of where the David Dukes and Kevin McDonalds have always stood based on the quibbles of far-right ideologues. (And this has nothing to do with your posting from an IP address, which is your perfect right to do.) --Orange Mike | Talk 20:11, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

"White nationalists don't admit they are white supremacists; but reading..." Facts don't matter, just project whatever you like and when reality buts in, put your fingers in your ears and scream "racist". It's unfortunate that Wikipedia, a site that refused to call Kim Jong-Il a "dictator" because it isn't "neutral", has been hijacked by left wing religious fundamentalists. I now understand why this site has been described as "the world's largest MMORPG."

Just to show this bullshit above for what it is, re: "Not all of us IP editors came from Stormfront or similar organizations,", see [http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t916979-4/ "Bump, the month has passed and now we can use the talk section again in hopes to get the "white supremacist" lie wiped off of Wikipedia."] posted 11-08-2012, 07:45 AM by SF member AntiZionism, coincidentally just a little earlier in the day from when this section was started. Heiro 05:37, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually it isn't bullshit, I'd edit the lie out myself but the page is locked, and I have as much to do with Stormfront as you do with the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.144.167 (talk) 02:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Political position

Is "Third Position" really still valid? Judging by their website they are masquerading as a paleoconservative/libertarian party, regardless its far from Strasserism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Netuwerrk (talk • contribs) 18:00, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2015

The idea that American Freedom Party promotes White Supremacy is NOT TRUE. The sources listed have an extreme anti-white bias and wish to libel/slander. There might be some people within the party that believe in such an ideology, but it's nothing of the sort is listed on their platform. Using the southern poverty law center as a "source" on whites is identical to using the Aryan Nations as a source on Jews. Linuxl3wis (talk) 00:21, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

 Not done Just because an article doesn't support your bias doesn't mean that it is biased. Your claims that the SPLC is anti-white is the sort of nonsense bullshit that a white supremacist would vomit. The AFP's motto is "a party for white Americans." To claim that they're not white supremacists would require either trolling or a disqualifying incompetence. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2015

Please change "promotes white supremacy" to "promotes Nationalism," or erase it entirely. 'supremacy' is defined as "the state or condition of being superior to all others in authority, power, or status." There is no credible evidence or source provided that this political party promotes superiority of the White race over all other races. After reading through official content published by this political party, there seems to be nothing suggesting their alleged positioning to be true.

Ricci ryan1212 (talk) 16:59, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Comment: On Wikipedia, generally it's preferred to have reliable secondary sources (if available) backing up information in articles, as opposed to primary sources. The party's description of itself is a primary source, and thus, not as reliable as secondary sources' descriptions of the party. See WP:PSTS for more on this topic. Rockypedia (talk) 19:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. JustBerry (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Request to add new section on 2016 Presidential campaign

I'm recommending the creation of a section on their 2016 campaign; with Bob Whitaker as their Presidential candidate and Tom Bowie as their Vice-Presidential candidate. The campaign has been noted and mentioned in multiple media outlets, not just media from the from the Party's websites. Considering the last major update to this page was their 2013 name change, I'm thinking the article is in serious need of updating. Below are the sourced pages on the campaign and different candidates:

Bob Whitaker: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2015/08/13/white-nationalist-american-freedom-party-gears-2016

Bob Whitaker: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/21/white-nationalists-launch-robocalls-about-white-genocide-for-2016-campaign.html

Tom Bowie and other candidates: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2015/10/19/meet-new-wave-extremists-gearing-2016-elections

Tom Bowie: http://www.independentpolitialreport.com/2015/11/american-freedom-party-officially-announces-vice-presidential-candidate/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:B11E:2640:8A5:F6E5:CB7C:BDD4 (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

White supremacist?

The introduction claims that the party "promotes white supremacy". But there is nothing in the article that indicates that this is a party policy.Royalcourtier (talk) 02:33, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on American Freedom Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:54, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

See here. Would Bob Whitaker's campaign logo be PD-simple or fair use? (Please notify me if there is a reply) MB298 (talk) 19:13, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on American Freedom Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:35, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Freedom Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:06, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Some recent events to add to article?

Emails Show How White Nationalists Are Rebranding To Help Donald Trump. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-american-freedom-party-emails_us_5702b470e4b0a06d580659c7?3v8l4n29

I'm sure there'll be some complaints on the source, but there are two items here that could be further verified and added to the article: 1. Robert Whitaker was running for president in 2016 under the American Freedom Party banner, 2) He has recently dropped out of the race, due in some part to his opposition to the the AFP's support for Donald Trump. Number 1 is fairly straightforward: he filed with the FEC and has a rather well-designed campaign website, so this should probably be added. Number 2 is a little more contentious - we're going to want more than 1 HuffPo source to confirm that the AFP "has committed to supporting Donald Trump," that Whitaker actually has dropped out, and that he dropped out because they neglected his candidacy in favor of Mr. Trump. These aspects would require more research on this topic than I'm willing to do ATM. Alt lys er svunnet hen (talk) 03:32, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:American_Freedom_Party/Archive_3&oldid=1258029893"