Talk:Kalle Lasn

Pronunciation of surname
How is Mr. Lasn's name pronounced? Anonymousmouse 06:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC) anonymousmouse
 * Like lussen. Andres (talk) 16:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Unruly citation
I found a source citation for the last quote, but evidently don't understand how to insert it so it'll appear under the (newly created) heading References (or perhaps elsewhere?)... The following is the content: So if a savvy editor would kindly look at the edit history and fix this, we'll have one "Citation needed" template fewer. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 13:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ... and this is the web link
 * ... and this is the web link

this link too: http://web.archive.org/web/20040223012106/http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/52/articles/jewish.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.108.103.46 (talk) 23:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Categories
Any sources for Category:estonian socialists etc?--Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 13:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Allegations of anti-Semitism
user:Germinal1848 had deleted an entire section claiming it was libelous or potentially libelous.

The section was sourced to the charge of anti-Semitism, and a link to the writing itself. Our article made no charge that was not in the source. In fact, this isn't the only source we could use. We could find others.

My previous revert asked the editor to explain his reasoning in talk. He reverted again, with the same vacant phrase, but chose not to explain in detail here.

I'm reverting his deletion, and asking again that he explain. This is to be an article on Mr. Lasn. We're not building a shrine.

-- Randy2063 (talk) 19:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Why is someone deleting a link to the Adbusters article? It's a link to another wikipedia article. The inclusion of the link to the Adbusters article should have been an acceptable compromise. I have added the POV template. 184.100.89.131 (talk) 05:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


 * On initially reading it, the first thing that jumps out at me is that it doesn't follow Wikipedia's style. I've never seen a WP:BLP where a one-sentence section has been added in this fashion, vaguely telling the reader "for details on this, go to a section in another article".  Plus that section turns out to be something that doesn't specifically center on the BLP subject at issue (Mr. Lasn), nor does it even mention his name.  What you added was reverted, whereupon you immediately re-inserted it.  Per WP:BRD, I'm going to revert it back out again and respectfully ask that you engage with the other editors here for further discussion of this issue before re-inserting it again.  That doesn't mean the issue is over - it just means that we should discuss it and reach consensus first.  Also, please note that the anti-semitism issue is being discussed more robustly below, in the thread that Nowa started.  One thing that is becoming readily apparent is that there is going to be need to be better reliable secondary sourcing discussing the issue of Mr. Lasn and accusations of anti-semitism if it's going to be added to this BLP.  Also, the information needs to be specific, not vague.  You might want to give WP:BLP a careful read first, if you haven't done so already.  Hope that helps... regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 15:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Protected
This article has been fully protected three days due to a report at WP:AN3. A paragraph was added suggesting that Kalle Lasn was anti-semitic. Those who are concerned about this matter should open a discussion at WP:BLP/N. If reverts continue before a talk page consensus has been found, blocks may be issued. EdJohnston (talk) 17:24, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Accusations of Anti-Semitism
The section below has been contentious. I recommend this be further vetted on talk until consensus is reached. Ref tags have been nowikied so we can see the references. I further recommend that we first reach consensus on what references, if any, are reliable secondary sources. That will guide what content, if any is appropriate.--Nowa (talk) 18:22, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Lasn has been accused of anti-Semitism by members of the media for his self-published 2004 article "Why won't anyone say they are Jewish?" establishing a link between Jewish groups who do not explicitly announce their religion and ultimate control of the United States foreign policy. ref name="AdbustersJewish"> In 2010, Lasn's magazine published a photo montage comparing the WWII Warsaw ghetto to current day Gaza Strip.	 

Here is a breakout of the references. Please indicate whether or not you feel they meet the criteria of a reliable secondary source.--Nowa (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Commentary (magazine)
Alana Goodman, "Organizer Behind Occupy Wall Street has History of Anti-Jewish Writing", October 13, 2004 Reliable secondary source?
 * as the self-described "flagship of neoconservatism", this is not a neutral source. Good only for citing Ms. Goodman's opinions. Including criticism from this sort would fall afoul of WP:UNDUE imo.  The Interior  (Talk) 19:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Adbusters
Kalle Lasn, “Why won't anyone say they are Jewish?”, Adbusters, March/April 2004 Reliable secondary source?

Mondoweiss
Adam Horowitz, "A tale of two ghettos", November 4, 2010 Reliable secondary source?


 * To say it was "members of the media" isn't quite right. Most of the media tend to ignore what Adbusters does, particularly back in 2004.
 * Keep in mind that Adbusters is a fringe organization. They're not going to attract all that much attention from the mainstream press.  Most of what we have now is due to their association with the Occupy crowd.  People who oppose the Occupynanigans are bringing it up as guilt by association.
 * The New York Observer is basically saying that here -- which can count as a source describing Lasn as anti-Semitic.
 * But, as I said, other than The Observer, it's mostly conservatives. NYT columnist David Brooks wrote a piece called "The Milquetoast Radicals" where he said Adbusters was "previously best known for the 2004 essay, 'Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?' — an investigative report that identified some of the most influential Jews in America and their nefarious grip on policy."  As an Obama supporter, Brooks isn't really that far on the conservative scale, but that's as far as it goes for the Times.
 * Conservative media analysts at MRC.org refer to it as "the paper’s notorious 2004 attack on neo-conservatives."
 * The Weekly Standard doesn't say so directly, but they don't think anyone doubts it's anti-Semitism either.
 * To be sure, we also need to give Lasn's side of the story. There is a response to charges here.
 * BTW: The archive link to Adbusters above should really be considered the example rather than a reference for the charge.  Which ever way this goes, that should probably be an external link rather than a reference.
 * -- Randy2063 (talk) 17:50, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Anti-semetisim text
The issue of anti-semitism is worth noting in the article. It should remain neutral NPOV, of course. To that end, it should stick to the plot-level of what happened. He wrote an article that his opponents and possibly others found to be anti-semetic, and was the source of debate, so much so, that he felt the need to respond to it in writing with his name in the by line. There is no need to quote the people who made the accusations, or give credence. Keeping it to what he wrote, the article can remain neutral and biographical. --198.203.181.181 (talk) 20:26, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Quote resource, relating to the Occupy movement
NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/28/business/media/the-branding-of-the-occupy-movement.html by William Yardley, published November 27, 2011...

See Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Rescission,

99.35.12.139 (talk) 05:46, 30 November 2011 (UTC)