Talk:Robert B. Spencer

Quality of English
In view of the fact that editing this article is not permitted, can those who are in the inner circle and have that access please alter the last sentence of the article to read: Breivik [omit] later admitted that he had long been a neo-Nazi who only in later years had exploited counter-jihad writings. (Three small changes to verb tenses for better sense.)

Robert Spencer became Orthodox
Interview with Robert Spencer, author of The Church and the Pope — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.115.91.205 (talk) 06:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Removed Source: "American Islamophobia’s Fake Facts", Arnold R. Isaacs, 09 August 2018.
A citation template for the article "American Islamophobia’s Fake Facts" by Arnold R. Isaacs was removed here, giving as a reason that the containing publication was The Unz Review. As the article was being cited three times, there are now cite errors in the Wikipedia article.

An alternative source for the article is Salon. Salon has been discussed a number of times on the Reliable Source Noticeboard, but not, as far as I've been able to determine, with any formal conclusion being reached.

   ←   ZScarpia  20:43, 8 August 2021 (UTC)


 * The Salon article was republished from TomDispatch, the blog of the Type Media Center, an organization previously associated with The Nation . I haven't looked into the reliability of TomDispatch, but editors on the reliable sources noticeboard might be able to help. —  Newslinger   talk   04:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 November 2021
Robert Bruce Spencer (born 1962)[1] is an American anti-Muslim. This should be changed to "Robert Bruce Spencer (born 1962)[1] is an anti-Islam American.  (I have never heard him speak against Muslims as persons but about the ideology/religion of Islam. To label him as anti-Muslim is false. ) Geo Edat (talk) 19:18, 22 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. It is well cited with that term. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:37, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

↑ I second this notion, the article is painting him as a racist when he is not he only has a problem with islam and islamic extremists; labeling him as anti-muslim is PATENTLY false and is very clearly intended to be an ad-hominem attack by biased writers. 69.154.131.151 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:10, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Anti-Muslim vs Anti-Islamic
@User:Snuish2 Many sources mentioned were unreliable. Relevant diffs - 1, 2 Ping @ User:ZScarpia Dhawangupta (talk) 07:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, they certainly are reliable. Take it to WP:RSN if you disagree with its reliability. Do not whitewash Spencer. WikiLinuz  🍁 ( talk ) 18:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * One of them has been discussed, without conclusion. That is why I pinged others for more discussion.Dhawangupta (talk) 07:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * OK. So there is no consensus about Salon as summarized by WP:SALON.COM. However, the article also cites the Washington Post, the BBC, and a book. Do you have concerns about any of the other sources? Snuish (talk) 23:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * If you are being disruptive once again—such as whitewashing the articles—you will most likely be AE sanctioned and topic-banned. WikiLinuz  🍁 ( talk ) 18:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Is that a threat?Dhawangupta (talk) 07:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've added multiple high-quality academic sources to support the "anti-Muslim"/"Islamophobic" descriptors. —  Newslinger  talk   00:34, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Phillip L. Jones
 * Salon.com is not a high-quality academic source! Neither is the Islamic University of Malaysia, or the Washington Post, or the BBC, or the New York Times! All of your sources are peddlers of far-left agitprop! You and the sources you cite zero evidence that Robert Spencer portrays all Muslims as terrorists or fanatics, wants Muslims to be deprived of those rights, or deported or killed, or believes they are are all suspicious, or anything that can even be remotely described as anti-Muslim. All Spencer odes is destroy the myth that Islam is a religion of peace, or that Muslim extremists are distorting their texts and holy books to justify terrorism. That’s why you and the rest of the leftist establishment attack him. You’re islamophillic appeasers! I don’t know why Robert Spencer hasn’t sued Wikipedia and its writers for libel, but when I become a famous critic of Islam, I assure you I will!
 * Also, why isn’t Chomsky described as antisemitic, even though he said the following:  'Jews in the US are the most privileged and influential part of the population... Anti-Semitism is no longer a problem, fortunately... it's raised because privileged people want to make sure they have total control, not just 98% control.' http://variant.org.uk/16texts/Chomsky.html 98.166.60.126 (talk) 04:38, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

"Anti-Muslim" vs "Anti-Islam"
Just posting to say that I did make a controversial change to this article. I probably shouldn't have since I haven't established consensus based on any reliable sources. Python Drink (talk) 20:53, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:DUE. -- WikiLinuz { talk } 🍁  03:03, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You were completely in the right and wikilinuz is wrong, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Robert_B._Spencer#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_10_July_2023:~:text=I%20completely%20agree,October%202023%20(UTC) from the person being smeared themselves. 69.154.131.151 (talk) 02:16, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Unsourced text under "Career" section
The paragraph starting from Spencer’s interactions with practicing liberal Muslims have [...] and K.S. Lal. doesn't cite any sources. Such an excessive amount of unsourced text violates our BLP policies. It should either be removed as a whole, or the original editor should add inline citations. -- WikiLinuz { talk } 🍁  21:04, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I have removed the material. There is more discussion on the talk page of the user who added it. Snuish (talk) 21:55, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2023
This is obviously written in an extremely biased way against this man. Have you made any attempt to check the validity of the information he provides, or simply allowed someone to tar and feather him? 75.100.91.190 (talk) 01:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Lightoil (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

The Critical Qur'an
Spencer's new book The Critical Qur'an came out a couple of days ago. Please add this to the article. 2601:C4:C300:2890:A4F9:91E6:4B54:8DC6 (talk) 00:03, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 July 2023
Why is Robert Spencer being called anti Muslim for just stating the truth about Islam? Truth is subverted when the goal becomes 'protecting the reputation of a subject' rather than going threadbare into it. Please remove the 'anti Muslim' tag. It's just feeding into the fundamentalist frenzy 106.201.184.215 (talk) 07:21, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: because multiple reliable sources describe him as such. M.Bitton (talk) 08:36, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with this point from 106.201.184.215 (as well as several others who have requested this change), these "sources" are patently false smear pieces that are just ad-hominem attacks, anti-muslim NEEDS to be changed to "anti-islam". Not doing so shows clear bias and is not an impartial review on his positions/character that borders on the line of libel. No where in any of his books or his site are critical of muslims themselves just the practice of islam, the closest he has come is in the title of his book "onward muslim soldiers", but this is only in reference to how tenants of islam identify themselves as muslim. . 69.154.131.151 (talk) 69.154.131.151 (talk) 20:14, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Please see the seven high-quality academic sources supporting the anti-Muslim/Islamophobic descriptor that were restored to the article, now listed at . —  Newslinger  talk   19:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, then should we change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_people_and_Islam#:~:text=Abu%20Bakr%20apparently%20recommended%20toppling%20a%20wall%20on%20the%20culprit%2C%20or%20else%20burning%20him%20alive to LGBT people and Muslims as well? Because a lot of this is based on writing within the quran's surahs, the sunnahs, the hadiths, and islamic scholar's writings which is where all the points Robert Spencer's are coming from...  Just don't want to see double standards and would like to see consistent language applied for topics. Example from that article that is over lgbt and islam references writings from Abu Bakr (one of muhammad's followers who happens to identify as a muslim) like crushing gay people with walls, the same sources that robert spencer's points come from but he is categorized as anti-muslim rather than anti-islam.  This may be anecdotal, but even chatGPT seems to agree that a lot of people interpret his work differently on this one that there isn't any strong evidence of him attacking muslim people, but more so the religion of islam and jihad--- https://chat.openai.com/share/1c0153db-3bab-47c7-ab19-96191cf09913 It's important to note that the line between critiquing the religion of Islam and promoting anti-Muslim sentiments can sometimes be blurred, and individuals may interpret his writings differently. To provide a more accurate understanding of his views, I can offer a quote from Robert Spencer himself to illustrate his perspective: "Jihad in Islamic history is much broader and deeper than a mere call to individual self-improvement. It is the collective duty of the Muslim community (umma) to establish and maintain the hegemony of the Islamic social order in the world. In traditional Islamic theology, this was a corollary of the Prophet Muhammad's status as the final prophet. When he died, the prophetic mission was not over; it had just begun. The political mission of Islam was to be the final divine mission to the human race, and it was to be fulfilled by the instrument of jihad."   69.154.131.151 (talk) 00:20, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Per the verifiability policy, Wikipedia articles are based on reliable sources like the high-quality academic sources cited in this article. ChatGPT and other large language models are not reliable sources; see Large language models (WP:LLM) for details. —  Newslinger  talk   04:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Understandably so, which is why I said that it was only anecdotal; but that being said, these sources seem to be biased (maybe unintentional but from many other people on the talk page's perspectives and Spencer's own words) and are just confusing muslims and islam) in the sense that they are lumping him in to a category that would make him seem like his organizations are hate groups by phrasing it as anti-muslim and different people ae interpreting his works differently, and I'd argue that these sources are confusing the distinction between mulsim people and the religion of islam itself. 69.154.131.151 (talk) 19:32, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Understandably so, which is why I said that it was only anecdotal; but that being said, these sources seem to be biased (maybe unintentional but from many other people on the talk page's perspectives and Spencer's own words) and are just confusing muslims and islam) in the sense that they are lumping him in to a category that would make him seem like his organizations are hate groups by phrasing it as anti-muslim and different people ae interpreting his works differently, and I'd argue that these sources are confusing the distinction between mulsim people and the religion of islam itself. 69.154.131.151 (talk) 19:32, 16 October 2023 (UTC)