Talk:Lauren Southern/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2022

Adding sources to the claim "Some academics and journalists have described Southern as a white nationalist..." would go a long way for the sake of political balance. Being able to source such a claim is quite important, otherwise it isn't known if there is a political bias of individuals who would make such a strong claim. 74.78.26.148 (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

If you press the note marked as ^[b], you will see the sources. Endwise (talk) 10:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

It's not about political balance. It's about accuracy.

The use of the terms "alt-right", "white nationalist" and "far-right" are supported by multiple admissible citations. For any changes to be made, you should suggest reliable sources which present Ms Southern in a different light. See: WP:RS and WP:BLP for some guidance. Hyperballad Eye (talk) 10:50, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

The notable source would be Ms Southern herself and her lawsuit against your website for defamation for listing her as something she claims to not be.

https://www.mixedtimes.com/news/lauren-southern-sends-defamation-complaint-to-wikipedia-over-long-running-smear-campaign

You are calling her something she does not believe in or publicly state to be, something used to defame her and attack her character that she personally states to not believe.

There is no better source than this, the person who holds the believes you are claiming to know.

This is why I dont donate to you and the example I give to anyone who thinks about donating to your site. Wikipedia will ignore people's actual words and get sued to publish smears about them. Dublin716 (talk) 22:11, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

That online tabloid does not appear to be a reliable source, in the sense of WP:RS. Newimpartial (talk) 23:09, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

It doesnt need to be for the point, the point is that she herself has a lawsuit against your website because it is falsely making claims about her, and you are still saying that is not enough to remove those claims.

A political affiliation is not a brand burned on by hateful people like those who initially branded her in the first place.

You are saying that these sites are fake news as you push a smear campaign against someone suing you for those smears.

That is wild that I just tried to link 2 other sources and both were black listed from your website, you also ban news sources. I really hope anyone who isnt already agreeing with you catches on that this site is just biased trash and unfounded smears. Dublin716 (talk) 05:10, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEZeqhTB5sA&t=1105s

Since you banned the only news sites that will report on it, here is her own words on the matter and about her lawsuit.

You are smear merchants, nothing more. Dublin716 (talk) 05:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Alt-right

Off-topic. WP article content is based on reliable sources, not on opinions devoid of sources

Southern has made it clear that she identifies as a conservative, so why is she still labeled as alt-right? 2603:8080:C401:BC90:8066:82FB:A243:97EC (talk) 03:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC) All you have to do is watch one or two of her videos on YouTube to see that she isn't alt-right. This particular page seems to have gone to great lengths to portray her as such, but she's mostly conservative, not alt-right. Unless alt-right doesn't mean what I think it means anymore. That's the problem with these terms; they're constantly shifting, and nobody can distinguish between alt-right and ordinary conservative thinking anymore. You can use me as a source, if you like. She's not alt-right. Robertwharvey (talk) 13:03, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunate. Perhaps we should discourage the use of sources from 4/5/6 years ago, at the beginning of Southern's career, and instead find (Wikipedia standards acceptable) sources that reflect her current political stances. I would actually consider her less conservative than Michael J. Knowles who is not alt-right. 24.156.179.25 (talk) 00:54, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

On a secondary note, such a label given to her isn't surprising when Wikipedia considers Buzzfeed as a reliable accurate source. This article used Buzzfeed 5 times, incredible. And to top it off the article also features Media Matters, calling her a "troll". Totally accurate and trustworthy, yup. Hard to be those things when articles written are so blatantly partisan. Not even trying to hide bias which does skew characterization of figures like Southern. 24.156.179.25 (talk) 01:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

If you would like to discuss the reliability of BuzzFeed News, WP:RSN is thataway. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 18:45, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Hilarious, you were one of the mods that was named by Southern for smearing her as a white nationalist, until her lawsuit forced you to take it down.

Take that L Dublin716 (talk) 05:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The characterization of "alt-right" is not about being more or less conservative. It refers to a focus on white or European identity, and also a certain mode of discourse. Knowles is probably more conservative than Southern on a bunch of social issues, but he did not praise Richard Spencer, he didn't go on a boat to prevent migrants from reaching Europe, he didn't associate with Stefan Molyneux, he didn't appear in podcasts with Nick Fuentes, etc. 108.176.106.24 (talk) 15:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm glad you're able to discern the two in that manner but the reality is that "alt-right" is seen as essentially, far-right adjacent. My main point initially wasn't using better sources, rather finding newer sources that title her as conservative (half of them are from 2017). Unlike using a source from 2017 saying someone is a murderer, political views do change over time (imagine if we still said Tulsi Gabbard is liberal because there are sources from 2017-early 2022 that say so). Many good sources saying Southern is a conservative are out there, but unfortunately the few that say she's alt-right will be handpicked instead. 24.156.179.25 (talk) 21:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah they actually flat out accused her of the things you are in this comment and she filed a lawsuit, then Wikipedia was forced to take them down.

So you are saying that Alt Right is basically their way of smearing her despite the lawsuit? Interesting that Wikipedia is just toilet paper at this point. Dublin716 (talk) 05:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately you were trying to be honest here and they are just smear merchants.

It took years of Lauren Southern suing Wikipedia to get them to remove the "White Nationalist" smear because that term actually had a definition.

As far as Alt Right, the meaning of that is less concrete so they are still able to smear her with it.... using Buzzfeed who knowingly published the Steele Dossier, that ended up almost all going unproven.

Then someone who thinks pronouns exists ignores your initial statement to cherry pick out the critique of a dishonored news outlet and only answers that part of it... completely ignoring the smear.

See how someone else just uses alt right any which way and gives no definition of it? It means White nationalist, Neo Nazi.... and Southern filed a lawsuit against Wikipedia for smearing her as a White Nationalist and they took that part down... but left another term that essentially means the same thing as this comment admits. Dublin716 (talk) 05:21, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia itself defines "alt-righ" as white nationalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right 185.105.180.151 (talk) 11:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Only because the alt-right article summarizes what other sources have said about it, and they all note strong elements of white nationalism and racism within the alt-right movement. —C.Fred (talk) 13:28, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Lauren Turner has never been married, Southern is a pseudonym

Lauren "Southern" is related to actress Sophie Turner. There is no record of either Lauren being married in either Canadian or Australian registries. 174.49.0.4 (talk) 01:01, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

What are your sources for her alleged name? —C.Fred (talk) 03:20, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

In Her Own Words

As of June 14, 2023, Lauren Southern discusses her own life:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INtuIHj7OXc

Also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqzJmdlJx0k

Seki1949 (talk) 21:15, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Lauren Southern was divorced by her husband over 18 months ago.

Lauren was divorced by her husband over 18 months ago. 103.106.76.140 (talk) 19:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

What reliable sources have published this? —C.Fred (talk) 01:38, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't know exactly how reliable a source it would be considered (as I'm not fully versed in Wikipedia's guidelines), but she did recently post on twitter that she no longer lives with her husband and that she hasn't been doing so for two years. (https://twitter.com/Lauren_Southern/status/1666883921790009344)

Would this be considered a reliable source? Emkut7 (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

"Lauren was divorced by her husband over 18 months ago." Do you know who divorced who? Divorce is normally a private matter. Perhaps 'Lauren Southern and her husband were divorced in [month] [year]' Seki1949 (talk) 01:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Shorten Intro

The introduction has information not necessary for that part of the article. Not only is it quite lengthy but much of the information presented is from events/sources 5-6 years ago. As many followers of her know she has much more nuanced views since her early 20's and to present all that information in the beginning creates a larger presumption to the average reader she still holds those exact views. It would only make sense information years old should be put in other sections of the article which is more of a timeline of her political career. Not to mention such views are not significant/relevant to her current character. 142.116.121.165 (talk) 18:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)