Talk:José Antonio Kast

Far right vs conservative
Someone keeps on changing the text from conservative to far right. This is reaching and sectarian. Far right isn't an established term and shouldn't be used as it is marginalizing. Omjeremy (talk) 12:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree. Maybe it's a little bit late, but I share the idea that today, at least in Chile, far right is very much used to, in some way, "criminalize" or at least outcast someone. There are movements and people in Chile that indeed promote violence and totalitarism, but we can say, impartially and not falling into personal opinions, that Kast is surely not one of them. Greetings, James2813 (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't think that supporting a past government that killed and tortured chileans is violent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.214.147.135 (talk) 13:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I have added several scholar works (eight, as of now), and some press articles, where Kast is described as a far-right politician (in one of them, to be honest, Kast is called a "derecha radical"/radical right politician). --Bedivere (talk) 01:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have restored the citations. I understand it's a good deal (19!) but in no way they should be removed without including them at some point in the content. I think it's pretty clear Kast is a far right politician, yet it seems to me you are trying to soften its wording not just by removing references, but also removing the far-right description from the lead, which is totally correct. Bedivere (talk) 14:29, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Firstly, if you revert my edits, I can report you as you are breaking the citation overkill and it is considered edit warring. Per, One cause of "citation overkill" is edit warring, which can lead to examples like "Graphism is the study[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] of ...". Extreme cases have seen fifteen or more footnotes after a single word, as an editor desperately tries to shore up one's point or overall notability of the subject with extra citations, in the hope that their opponents will accept that there are reliable sources for their edit. You are clearly pushing your own narrative and disregarding the lead policy, and continuing this will also lead to a report. He might be far-right politician but there is a POLICY of not using a position in the lead of an article, and you are currently breaking it. If you need any examples of how a lead should look, take a look at Donald Trump's article and Bolsonaro's (most famous examples). You do not state the position of a politican in the lead, even if you use 19 sources or not. The position of a politician is welcome in political views. I was going to report you just now, but as I assume you are doing it in good faith, so I can discuss this before going to a report.
 * As for removing the sources, WP:OVERKILL clearly states we can do that, per "If there are six citations on a point of information, and the first three are highly reputable sources (e.g., books published by university presses), and the last three citations are less reputable or less widely circulated (e.g., local newsletters), then trim out those less-reputable sources" and "If all of the citations are to highly reputable sources, another way to trim their number is to make sure that there is a good mix of types of sources. AFor example, if the six citations include two books, two journal articles, and two encyclopedia articles, the citations could be trimmed down to one citation from each type of source. Comprehensive works on a topic often include many of the same points. Not all such works on a topic need be cited – choose the one or ones that seem to be the best combination of eminent, balanced, and current." and in this case you are using 19 lol. And as far-right anyways has no place in the lead and we already have it in political views, there are no problems. If there are other disputes, Kast approving Augusto Pinochet is again not supposed to be in the lead, but in political views. Secondly, there is only one mention of right-wing being the top right-wing candidate, and this means of the right spectrum. He is supported by the right wing parties for the second round, and as the article talks about him vs Sichel (centre-right), he came out as top on the right spectrum. I don't know if this was you or not, but you/your edits added "far-right to far-right extremist", and when clicking goes to populist, populist and extremist is not the same thing as well as an unsourced NPOV violation of saying he doesn't want women to vote. My edits are only marking how the lead should be per Wikipedia policy, and removing one violation of NPOV and citation overkill. Any more reverts will be reported in per the grounds mentioned above, feel free to add information in the political views, but don't overkill it and follow the lead policy of politicians (there are plenty). I don't think there is any arguing in that he is far right, but that shouldn't be in lead but in political views and an WP:OVERKILL is not needed here. BastianMAT (talk) 14:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your prompt response. I agree these sources could be grouped, specially those that are academic, in principle. Regarding the other changes, I was not the one who did them and did not mean to restore them. --Bedivere (talk) 16:21, 5 December 2021 (UTC)'
 * No problem, probably some other guy that did that, well I'm glad to have reached a healthy and productive discussion. You are doing a good job in terms of adding content that is sourced. As long as you don't overkill it, I encourage you to continue doing what you do good here at Wikipedia! Cheers, and have a good day!BastianMAT (talk) 16:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Right wing to Far right
four separate english reliable sources refer to him as right-wing while five separate english reliable sources refer to him as far-right, all of which are cited in the article. Simply stating far-right alone is a complete BLP violation by unduly ignoring alternative descriptions. Bill Williams 22:52, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I invite you to check the 19 references I added (which were removed, but can be rescued) describing Kast as a far-right politician. No plain "right-wing": "far-right". And most are scholar works, not press articles. --Bedivere (talk) 23:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * most of those 19 citations were Spanish ones, which cannot be used as a source for the English term "far-right" which does not have precisely the same meaning as is used by those sources. Of the other citations, one of the only ones that I did not already include in my five "far-right" citations was one from The Intercept, which WP:Perennial states is "a biased source" that cannot be used to substantiate claims about a controversial politicians, and which MBFC states is highly biased towards the left-wing. Another was from the University of Mexico but I could not even access it to see if it substantiates your claims, and lastly the EuroNews source was definitely reliable. That still means you have six separate sources describing him as far-right while I already cited four that refer to him as right-wing, and I am sure I could find more. You have made seven reverts within the past 24 hours in clear violation of the three revert rule, so refrain from making further edits. Bill Williams 23:27, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no requisite that only English sources should be used. "Far-right" is "extrema derecha" in Spanish. As I mentioned in the previous section, there are two sources that mention "derecha radical" / "radical right", otherwise, "far-right"/"extrema derecha" is used to describe Kast's position. I know I have done enough reverts, but so have you. In 24 hours, you can be sure I will restore the version that describes Kast only as a far-right politician, because that's how he is described by scholarly sources. Finally, you may expect more Spanish-language sources about a Chilean (Spanish-speaking) topic than there are English-language ones; that is not a reason to exclude them from this English-language article. See WP:RS. --Bedivere (talk) 00:21, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There is every reason to exclude them because the Spanish term does not have precisely the same meaning as the English one, and they are less accessible for readers when we already have enough English sources for people to access. You are edit warring in a manner completely against WP guidelines, since three reverts is the maximum per 24 hours on a single article, while you made seven. Bill Williams 00:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It does have the same meaning: Far-right politics - es:Extrema derecha. There is absolutely no reason to exclude arbitrarily Spanish-language sources just because they are in Spanish, and not in English. Additionally, the available English-language sources may be subject to systemic bias, whereas the Spanish-language ones may not. Although it is correct that some sources refer to Kast as a right-wing politician, most refer to them as a far-right politician. Asserting that, supported by several reliable sources (that is, academic sources, not news articles as they are there now), is by no means a BLP violation nor an incorrect claim. --Bedivere (talk) 02:31, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I am sure that this dispute can be solved via RfC. Consensus can be reached in this way, and we can also decide what positions should be in the introduction section. The political positions section and the page itself are very short and they have to get expanded with information that can be found in English or Spanish. Vacant0 (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

is correct. Spanish sources can be applied to English Wikipedia (see WP:NOENG). Though English is preferred in most cases, topics that are primarily covered in other languages are not less reliable than English sources. Also, is correct with their use of "extrema derecha", which you can easily see in the Spanish language sister article of far-right politics.--WMrapids (talk) 02:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand that, but that does not mean we should solely refer to him as "far-right" when multiple sources also refer to him as "right-wing". Bill Williams 01:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I urge Bill to stop softening the wording of the article. Kast is a far-right politician. Period. --Bedivere (talk) 20:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not care what you think about him, but you have no consensus to place that in the lead, and it has been removed repeatedly by a number of editors. It only belongs in the body next to an accurate description of all his policies, not in the lead. Stop putting it there and we can discuss something else. Bill Williams 23:00, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

RfC: Ideology and positions in the introduction
Due to recent disputes, I'm opening this RfC so that we can settle on what should and shouldn't be included in the introduction/lead section.

1) Should Kast be described as either "right-wing" or "far-right" in the introduction, or should we leave out his political position?

2) Should Kast be described as a supporter of free market, socially conservative and right-wing populist policies in the introduction?

Discussion can take place in an another subsection below. Vacant0 (talk) 23:26, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That many sources (but not all, and specially not all academic sources) consider him far-right can be mentioned in the lede but it should not be in the first 1-3 introductory sentences since it is a controversial label that the person in question rejects. Dentren &#124; Talk 02:49, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Community consensus *on the basis of reliable sourcing*, as evidenced at Richard Desmond, indicates use of a term the subject disagrees with is perfectly acceptable in the first sentence. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 03:25, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Kast may reject being dubbed "far-right" but that is not a reason for us to accept, editorially speaking. --Bedivere (talk) 03:47, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Using reliable sources does not mean that every source should be given equal weight. There are for sure tons of sources copying the far-right trope but political scientists does not necessarily agree with it. Dentren &#124; Talk 17:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Dentren, more than a dozen academic sources (added into the article) disagree with your statement. --Bedivere (talk) 18:03, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * These academic sources need some scrutiny. It is clear from a random sample on Rovira Kaltwasser(2019) that the source is abused because it consistently calls Kast as belonging to the radical right rather than the far-right. Since the sources have been abused to back statements they do no include until we have scrutinized them all (page and citation from the text) that article should restrain itself from putting contentious labels on living persons.Dentren &#124; Ta<b style="color: Green">lk</b> 20:57, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You disagree with these sources' statements. Granted. That does not make them "dubious". All sources call Kast and his party extrema derecha, derecha radical or ultraderecha. If you wish to add quotes, you're welcome Bedivere (talk) 21:40, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Radical right is not the same thing than far-right. Do you accept this fact? <b style="color:green">Dentren</b> &#124; <b style="color: Grey;">Ta</b><b style="color: Green">lk</b> 22:03, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * They're synonymous. Radical right disambiguation includes: "Far-right politics, sometimes used interchangeably with "radical right"". So no, they're the same thing. Bedivere (talk) 23:55, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * According to Cristobal Rovira Kaltwasser who is cited in the article the terms are different. The compiled list of citation to state a mere fact that Kast is far-right needs to be reviewed and added specific quotes to avoid missunderstands as yours, or worse deliberate distortion of the sources to back a political contentious label. <b style="color:green">Dentren</b> &#124; <b style="color: Grey;">Ta</b><b style="color: Green">lk</b> 03:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I find it gross misunderstanding those sources, I don't think purposefully, but for sure you are wrong. I did check, read all of them and made sure they all referred to Mr. Kast and/or his political project as "far-right". You can go and check them. And the very reason I added those academic sources was because other users (Bill Williams, to be exact) thought 1) Spanish-language sources should not be used (WRONG) and 2) press sources are not reliable (ok, granted, that's why the academic sources, peer-reviewed, make the point exactly as they should: Kast is a far-right politician. Period). --Bedivere (talk) 04:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC) P.S. Rovira's interview is a press source and, of course, those of academic sources are of greater value (reliability, speaking of). --Bedivere (talk) 04:52, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Given some of the comments here, and to assist with contributions below, some sourcing.

Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:22, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Goldsztajn. --Bedivere (talk) 15:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Opinions (Question 1)
Oppose inclusion those two terms are vague and unnecessary when his precise positions, e.g. opposition to abortion, same sex marriage, and illegal immigration, in addition to his support for free market economics and law and order, are already stated clearly in the lead. "Far-right" hyperlinks to an article describing numerous positions of Nazis that do not accurately describe Kast, so adding that to the lead provides no benefit to readers and only misleads them. "Far-right" is already stated in the body, and that is where it belongs, if readers want to know a more detailed description of his policy proposals. Bill Williams 23:36, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support over-whelming preponderance of reliable sources refer to Kast as a far-right politician (he's also termed ultra-conservative and extreme right), the mixture of his politics is not adequately conveyed by the far more vague right-wing. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 00:43, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support basically per Goldztajn. There are tons of sources describing him as far-right, and Kast rejecting such label is not a reason to disregard it. Although the far-right article itself refers to more extreme positions, that is a problem of such article, not this. --Bedivere (talk) 03:45, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose using "far-right" as a descriptor in the first sentences of the article. The use of the far-right label for JAK should have some accompanying commentary in the article. <b style="color:green">Dentren</b> &#124; <b style="color: Grey;">Ta</b><b style="color: Green">lk</b> 17:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Opinions (Question 2)
Support inclusion of course he must be described as "a populist who supports law and order and free market policies, while opposing abortion, same-sex marriage, and illegal immigration" since that describes the vast majority that has been discussed about him and the most major issues he focuses on. Without this, nothing is stated at all on what he actually believes in the lead. Bill Williams 23:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support although socially conservative needs to be elaborated - eg there are socially conservative LGBTIQ+ people, libertarians support same-sex marriage ... Kast is more than simply socially conservative. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 00:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per above. Describing Kast as a far-right in the lede (not really just in the first sentence or paragraph) can be "compatibilized" with this proposal. --Bedivere (talk) 03:46, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. The populist label should have its inline references in the lead or elsewhere in the article. <b style="color:green">Dentren</b> &#124; <b style="color: Grey;">Ta</b><b style="color: Green">lk</b> 17:43, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Discussion
have comments above this discussion pertaining to this issue, and therefore it makes sense to ping them on it. Also for comparison, the lead of the Spanish article, which is more detailed in some sections than this English article, makes no mention of "right-wing" or "far-right" in the lead, but it also does not mention any of his policies. I think the best approach would be to mention his policies but not what "wing" he belongs to, as the policies are specific while the "wing" is vague and redundant. Experts who refer to Kast as far-right and the reasons for doing so is mentioned in the body, and putting all of that in the lead would take up too much space. Bill Williams 23:45, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Nothing complicated or confusing about adding the term "far-right" in front of the word politician in the first sentence, that is all that is necessary. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 01:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * False, "far-right" is "fascism and Nazism, today far-right politics include neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, the Third Position, the alt-right, racial supremacism, and other ideologies or organizations that feature aspects of ultranationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, theocratic, racist, homophobic, transphobic, or reactionary views" and almost no reliable sources describe him this way. Yes, a few have accused him of ultranationalism and xenophobia but none of the other fascist positions and rarely do reliable sources actually claim that he is those things, therefore it is highly misleading to refer to him as "far-right" in the lead when it will link to an article on facism. Bill Williams 14:30, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If you perceive problems with the far-right article, there are no impediments to contributions towards its improvement; but that has no bearing whatsoever on the issue at hand here. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The far right article describes far-right positions that Kast does not hold. Not a single academic source states that he holds these far-right positions, only a few vaguely refer to him as "far-right", and academically that is an incorrect term, as stated by reliable sources. In no way does it belong in the lead. Bill Williams 17:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Aldo Madariaga described Kast in his 2020 book "Neoliberal Resilience: Lessons in Democracy and Development from Latin America and Eastern Europe" as ...homophobic and xenophobic overtones of its European counterparts
 * Kapiszewski, Levitsky, and Yashar (2021) described Kast as "far-right" in "The Inclusionary Turn in Latin American Democracies"
 * Goldstein (2019) described Kast as "far-right" in "The New Far-Right in Brazil and the Construction of a Right-Wing Order"
 * Oxford Analytica (2017 and 2021) described Kast as "far-right" in "Chile's Pinera may struggle to win presidential runoff" and "Anniversary protest violence raises Chile uncertainty"
 * Hoeveler (2020) described Kast as "far-right" in "The Political Economy of Bolsonarism and its impact over Latin America"
 * Benedikter, Zlosilo (2017) describe Kast as "extreme right" in the "Chile's 2017 presidential election: who will win and why?"
 * Lebhar (2018) describe Kast as "far-right" in the "Confounding Experts, a Familiar Face Returns to Power in Chile"
 * Bar-On, Molas (2021) described Kast as "national populist" and "radical right" in the "The Right and Radical Right in the Americas"
 * Kaltwasser (2019) described Kast as part of the "radical right" in the "The Programmatic (Over)adaptation of the Chilean Right and the Irruption of the Radical Populist Right"
 * Sandoval-Aguero (2018) described Kast as "right-wing" in the "What Are The Causes Behind The New Chilean Political Actors? Frente Amplio, José Antonio Kast And The Crisis Of Representation" Vacant0 (talk) 18:59, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I wasn't able to find more academic sources besides a couple of these. Hope it helps. Vacant0 (talk) 19:01, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Sandoval-Aguero (2018) described Kast as "right-wing" in the "What Are The Causes Behind The New Chilean Political Actors? Frente Amplio, José Antonio Kast And The Crisis Of Representation" Vacant0 (talk) 18:59, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I wasn't able to find more academic sources besides a couple of these. Hope it helps. Vacant0 (talk) 19:01, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Relevance of Kast's Father's Alleged Involvement with the Nazi Party
An IP has just deleted the reference to Kast's father's alleged involvment with the Nazi party, this is a topic that seems to come back up however. There are two issues that I see at play in this regard. 1.) Is it relevant? Ie is it relevant to the wiki article about Jose Antonio Kast whether his father was affiliated with the Nazi party? I don't really think it is. I understand that the idea is JAK is far right, father has been alleged to be part of the nazi party one influences the other, but this would be WP:OR. 2.) There are WP:BLP considerations. Michael Kast is recently deceased which means he still falls under BLP protection. His involvement is controversial. It's true that the allegations exist and most point to the fact that a man named Michael Kast is documented as having joined the Nazi Party in 1942, but JAK's father denies involvement, and JAK has also maintained that his father never joined the party, based on this it seems like saying "Michael Kast was a member of X party" is really risky without qualifications, and if it's not absolutely necessary for the article I believe that it is better to be left out. 2806:107E:D:76CF:9511:7F58:51A6:8653 (talk) 17:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it is relevant. Michael Kast may be relevant enough to merit his own article, in fact, for his alleged participation in crimes during the military dictatorship of Pinochet. In this article, particularly, I think it is correct to point out and describe who was his father (even if he had a stand-alone article) because it provides context. Sources back Michael Kast's Nazi Party membership, but I think we could do with a note adding José Antonio denies Michael had such membership (despite the documents recently revealed by journalist Weibel and the German National Archives). --Bedivere (talk) 04:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The Economist just published an article where they stated that he was a member of the Nazi party, so I added the article as an RS. Also he does have a wiki page Michael Kast. Despite the Economist having published that I'm still against the inclusion of it in the Article for WP:Relevance. For instance Angela Merkel's father was a member of the Hitler Youth, but no where on Angela Merkel's page does it mention that. So following her article it seems that it also shouldn't be included in JAK's page, because it's not relevant. 189.146.245.116 (talk) 14:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It is absolutely relevant to note that somebody fleeing Germany in 1950 to Latin America was a Nazi. When talking about German politicians, its almost a given that their parents were probably in the Hitler Youth since it was literally mandatory; direct ties like that to the Nazi regime are not exactly the standard in Chile. That his father came over on the rat lines is relevant considering he went on to work for Pinochet, his son went on to work for Pinochet, and now his other son is the leader of a far-right political party. That José Antonio denies that his father was a Nazi (and that his brother carried on their family's work) deserves only a footnote, and should not be receiving the same billing as the fact that his father was one. This entire family is tied up in Chilean Fascism, trying to remove reference to his father being a Nazi is only an attempt to obfuscate that. SomerIsland (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * What exists on the Merkel page is irrelevant for discussion here; if Kast had become a communist, his father's background would still be relevant. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 19:57, 20 December 2021 (UTC)