Talk:Árpád von Nahodyl

Did the media allege or merely report on allegations?
recently changed the section about media reporting about the Heidnische Gemeinschaft in the 80s. The previous text stated that the media came with accusations against the group, but in Grayfell's version, the media merely "reported on allegations that the group was based on Nazi ideology". The source does talk about reporting on allegations, for example how Bild-Zeitung quoted "West Berlin's evangelical advisor on sects", but most of the allegations are only attributed to the newspapers themselves.

Here is what the source (Hegner 2015, pp. 181–182) says about Nazi allegations (I've ellipsed out the cult allegations, which also are substantially covered in the same source):


 * "It did not take long for city officials to notice the group and its rituals. Local journalists were alerted and began reporting on these 'Pagans and witches', aligning them with religious groups like Jim Jones's People's Temple. ... Public interest in this small group grew enormously. In the view of the national West German media, Matthias and the other group members became probably the most famous Pagans in the German context. Some of the most popular dailies, including Der Spiegel and the widely read national tabloid newspaper Bild-Zeiting, wrote about them, warning against a religion apparently based on Nazi ideology (Bild-Zeiting, 24 February 1984; Der Spiegel, 7 January 1985: 71, 74)."

I have kept some of Grayfell's wording, but removed that the media merely reported on allegations from other people. Ffranc (talk) 08:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * One underlying issue is that this is redundant with the same scrutiny towards the Green Party mentioned in #Political activity. Dividing this into two sections may not be an appropriate way to explain this.
 * Additionally, if Der Spiegel is reliable enough to cite, it is reliable enough to summarize. It is not appropriate to use editorializing language to cast doubt on reliable sources. Examples of this include saying "in reality". Sources decide reality, not editors. Territory and identity is cryptic, bordering on euphemistic, as well. Nobody cares about territory and identity, and that is not, in isolation, what makes this group controversial. Grayfell (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The media reporting began before the Spiegel article, and the text here attempts to summarize the entirety of the reporting, based on Hegner. But I don't think the current version makes any breaches of WP:BLP, so I'll leave it as it is. Ffranc (talk) 08:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)