Talk:National Vanguard (United States)

Virginia: Albemarle County Low‑importance

	Virginia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia 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.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albemarle County, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.

Activities

The "activities" section seems unnecessarily detailed. Is there some reason why we are listing every single activity of this group? We don't do that for any other organization that I know of. These could easily be summarized in a few sentences. -Willmcw 19:16, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. This section looks more like a guideline than an encyclopedic article. --Gramaic | Talk 01:47, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree. I want to propose the deletion of the entire paragraph:

Since the reorganization of National Vanguard, the group has been focused upon unit meetings and the distribution of fliers. A boycott against the hardware chain The Home Depot was started because of their perceived undocumented immigrant stance. Units in Florida, Nevada, and New Jersey appear to be the most active. Members are attempting to form a new political party in Nevada: the White People's Party.

I follow this group closely, and I note that their flyer distribution is down to nothing and their "attempt to form a new political party" is going nowhere. Listing these goals seems no more relevant than listing my goal to become a millionaire -- if they achieve it, great, let's note it, but until then, I think it should be deleted. HateWatcher 01:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These crackers are KURAZAH —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.160.190.87 (talk) 06:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Activities cont.

While I don't necessarily see an "activities" section on most other organization's descriptions, they most certainly list (and promote) their activities throughout the article; sometimes in terrific detail. Take a look at The Anti-Defamation League's description as an example. --Magnus Maximus | Talk 11:13, 29 October 2005

grammar

afaik, it is supremacy, but suprematist.

Supremacy/Suprematist

A suprematist is someone who is a student of suprematism, which is a school and theory of geometric abstract art.

The correct term for someone who is a believer of any type of supremacy is supremacist, not suprematist.

Holy crap

This is by far the best-sourced article I have ever seen. Congrats. (I suppose it may be that way out of necessity...) Grand master ka 21:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take back America! We must save America from White Supremisists! Kill them all! Leave none alive!

Agreed.

Those comments about killing all the white supremisists are just as disgusting as the comments made by the white supremisists. You're not helping the cause against them by declaring they all should be killed. Sup dudes?[[User:Kitler005]] 18:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow I'm surprised that "kill kill kill" stuff ended up in the talk page and not the mainspace. Is this NPOV progress? 65.94.5.193 19:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it looks liek a silly joke. if it was seriosus vandlism then ti woudl be the article itself. Smith Jones 00:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are broken links

Many of the links for National vanguard sites do not work. Someone who follows this stuff should add or remove links to NV sites.Geo8rge (talk) 01:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Graffiti or just poor grammar?

The line "(this never occurred, the BoD has not change since 2003)" looked like hastily scrawled vandalism at first glance to me but it has been in the article for a while... I see three possibilities:
1. The BoD did change, and this fact is widely agreed upon, meaning the comment is graffiti.
2. There is not sufficient data to be sure of if the BoD changed or not, or there is conflicting data; in the case of a true conflict of history, this should be explained rather than just left in a confusing set of parantheses.
3. The BoD did NOT change, and this fact is widely agreed upon, meaning the comment is the truth, and should replace the original description.
In any case, the comment should be removed if it is outright false, and overhauled grammatically and explained if there is a dispute, rather than just left to... fester. Giovnni (talk) 14:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:04, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on National Vanguard (American organization). 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:54, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on National Vanguard (American organization). 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 or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National Vanguard (American organization). 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20051107011922/http://www.prussianblue.net:80/ to http://www.prussianblue.net/

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:54, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]