Talk:White pride/Archive 4

Category:White supremacy
Re these edits:


 * Related edits to Category:Neo-Nazism:

White pride is in Category:Neo-Nazism, which is Category:Nazism, which is Category:White supremacy, therefore White pride ought not also be in Category:White supremacy. WP:SUBCAT is clear on this:

If you think the category tree itself is incorrect (ie one of the cats ought not be in one of the other cats), then please fix it. If you disagree with WP:SUBCAT, then propose changing it at WT:CAT. Otherwise, please follow it. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:02, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


 * You do not understand the purpose of categories or the network structure of them. Your edits are disruptive, not the category rules. "Rarely" does not mean never. Hmains (talk) 03:23, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The sentence that I quoted from WP:SUBCAT seems fairly clear to me. While it's true that "rarely" does not mean "never", I suggest that the onus is on you to justify why WP:SUBCAT should not apply here.
 * Perhaps there is a problem with the category tree itself - should Category:Neo-Nazism not be in Category:Nazism, or should Category:Nazism not be in Category:White supremacy? If so, please fix the category tree.
 * Mitch Ames (talk) 03:29, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


 * No, the problem is with your simplistic disruptive edits that totally disregard the purpose of categories, which is to help readers navigate to articles, not to make a pretty (in some minds) category structure. Other editors have attempted to discuss this with you but you fall back to simplistic rote answers. Before you make changes, you need to read articles and see how other editors had a valid purpose in adding categories.  And read and comprehend the rest of the category rules, such as those involving non-diffusing categories and, while not helpful, many categories are non-diffusing even though the non-diffusing template has never been added to the category. They are still non-diffusing, regardless. Hmains (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I have read the "the rest of the rules" at WP:CAT, including WP:DUPCAT. If you think that some of the categories relevant to this discussion should be non-diffusing, then please tag them as such with the appropriate template(s). That would immediately resolve the problem and comply with the well-established and generally-accepted guidelines.
 * Personally I don't think any of the relevant categories here are non-diffusing, but if you tag the appropriate categories as such we might then discuss whether those specific categories should be diffusing or not - which is a separate discussion as to whether or not we should follow the unambiguous, well-established and generally-accepted, SUBCAT guideline (which explicitly allows for non-diffusing subcatetories). Mitch Ames (talk) 08:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * ... a pretty (in some minds) category structure ... That would be the minds of all the editors whose consensus created and supports WP:SUBCAT. If you disagree with SUBCAT, please propose a change to it. Otherwise I suggest that we should follow the consensus and the clearly stated guidelines. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I think it's wrong to have the whole category Category:Neo-Nazism contained in Category:White supremacy. A lot of the articles about Neo-Nazism aren't about white supremacy. It would be better to have the article Neo-Nazism contained in Category:White supremacy and to have a See also note in the header of Category:Neo-Nazism linking to Category:White supremacy. Marcocapelle (talk) 13:28, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you mean instead of ? Mitch Ames (talk) 12:40, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I did, thx for asking. I've corrected the sentence. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I believe your suggestion might work, but I suppose the editors adding the category think, based on the main article content, that Neo-Nazism is inherently white supremacist and so it does not matter whether each article in the category mentions white supremacy--it is always there. Hmains (talk) 19:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Racist?
I'm sorry, but all the other "pride" pages (black, gay, transgender) are "postive" and good. However, since we all know whites are the only racists on earth, Let's make white pride negative! Of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whybobby3 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)


 * See the FAQ at the top of the page - it covers this specific remark. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and therefore reliant on reliable sources written by external parties - as a result an article is little more than a synthesis of these external sources. If these sources are generally negative in nature this will generate an article written in a similar tone. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 19:24, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Okay, nice job hiding behind your biased rules. Guess this means I can make all the other pride articles be "racist" and full of "supremacists". Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whybobby3 (talk • contribs) 19:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely Biased
I believe it can be phrased in more positive light.

"White pride can be identified as the celebration of being of fair-skinned European origin and focus on the diverse cultures and languages they embrace - as well as emphasize their struggles to overcome many injustices they formed part of in history - moving forward as a race that is aware of historical impedances and endeavoring to shape a world that embraces every culture and race as equal - as a global family. Habashwe (talk) 15:00, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you source that? Our articles depend upon sources, I'll drop you a note explaining it. And I've never heard of this bit about a "global family" being linked to white pride. Doug Weller  talk 16:27, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Absolutely biased is right—the quoted passage above, that is. El_C 17:06, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Correcting "thusly" to "thus"
Can someone with permissions make this happen? "Thusly" is an embarrassing solecism, and leaving it in here will only spread ignorance, which is sort of the opposite of Wikipedia's mission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gfiddler (talk • contribs) 22:43, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Reverted addition of Disputed and URS tags
Please discuss specific issues with the sources. These tags have been discussed and removed before. It would be helpful if the person who added them could clarify before reverting. Edaham (talk) 23:39, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Removed the tags again today! Could please take a couple of moments to review the FAQ and discuss the issue here before reverting. Many thanks


 * also check out the info on template:npov, which will help you understand how and when to apply and remove this tag. In particular, take note of the section on so-called drive by tagging, which is discouraged and requests users to bring up their issues on the article's talk page when adding this template.

Many thanks! Edaham (talk) 01:23, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Please include the positive white pride
Not all white pride is racist. Sure there is some racism in every 'pride' group and many extreme white groups have used the term. It is fine to include that in the article, BUT it also needs to be mentioned that there are non racist uses for the term just like gay pride, black pride, asian pride, and any other pride. Saying there is no non racist context is bigoted and disrespectful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.79.186 (talk) 17:55, 17 March 2017‎
 * Please read the FAQ at the top of this page.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 18:11, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * White Mother's Pride is not racist, and toasts well. White pride is racist, as shown by reliable sources. . . dave souza, talk 21:48, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Sure it's shown racist by reliable sources. But some are left wing biased sources and do not account for all the uses for the term white pride. Just because you can find 'reliable' left wing articles does not make it any more true. Right wing articles are just as 'reliable' but also biased. Being reliable isn't the end all be all when your biased and wikipedia has a tendency to call left wing articles 'reliable' in a very unsettling way. Plenty of articles exist shown how black pride and other prides can and have been racist. Just because you do not agree with the non racist white pride does NOT mean it is a topic that should be banned from discussing. All forms of white pride should be discussed on Wikipedia to promote the truth. There are many fewer right wing news outlets to use compared to left wing news outlets, many of which left wing wikipedia users call unreliable whenever they are used. This presents clear political bias just by selection of sources and an underepresentation in media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.79.186 (talk) 22:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)


 * "...it's shown racist by reliable sources." Yes, exactly. You could've stopped there. There are plenty of reliable right-wing outlets, but since you have not presented any sources for this article at all, this is a waste of time. Grayfell (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

dude stop making every wikipedia article lean liberal. Don't inject your bias please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.79.186 (talk) 00:16, 18 March 2017 (UTC)


 * You're granting me an awful lot of power based on a big assumption. Thanks, I guess? This page is the place to talk about improving this article. If you admit that the article reflects reliable sources, and you don't have any new reliable sources to present, there's not a lot more to be said. Grayfell (talk) 00:25, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

The only thing reliable about it is how biased it is. As according to Wikipedia rule you can be 'reliable' but still biased. Every time someone advocates a right wing news source or article you revert it.

Yea, the they just claim it's a troll. Never donating to Wikipedia again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1004:B055:950B:ACA4:49A4:BFB3:8C0B (talk) 01:27, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

I agree with this addition 100%, how can pride for another race be justified but this one be completely partial and bastardized GreekAmerican (talk) 19:58, 1 April 2017 (UTC)


 * And what brought you here? Some website? Doug Weller talk 20:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Reddit, 4chan and unpleasant site] at least.  Doug Weller  talk 20:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

For people who argue for a positive white pride as in "gay pride"
Please make a list of White Pride organizations that reject White Nationalism and racism. Right now White pride and WN/"racialism" are completely impossible to distinguish, that's why the article is negative : it points out the dishonesty of using one as a code word for the other. The concept of white pride itself isn't racist in any way, but the tone of the article is about the people who identify with the term, who AFAIK are almost exclusively white nationalists and racists.

If you want to argue that the term is the equivalent of gay pride, show us White Pride organizations that want to live in harmony with other races. Gay Pride people don't want to split their country in two between the gay side and the straight side, and aren't known to believe that straight people are genetically inferior either.

Note that I completely support fighting the regressive left bias of Wikipedia that believes in "white privilege", that's a real problem. But even then there's hypocrisy from the people who support "white pride" themselves. The typical white nationalist blog/forum starts by saying "Why are white people called racist for being proud of their heritage, while minorities are praised for doing it?". That would be a great argument...if they didn't have an entire section dedicated to so-called "race realism" which aims at "scientifically" proving that whites are genetically superior!

So yeah, you need to show pro-white MODERATES who use the concept of "white pride" if you think it's falsely reduced to racist pro-white extremists. Show examples of these people and Wiki can make a section on them IMO. Hamstergamer (talk) 08:49, 29 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Mostly agree with your point, but I think it is important to point out that functionally, "The concept of white pride itself isn't racist in any way..." isn't true for the very reasons you outline. In an alternate universe, maybe we could imagine a way in which "white pride" isn't racist, as in a description of what Janet E. Helms offers as a kind of "cogniscence"... but we definitely don't live in such a universe (and the sources attest to this). jps (talk) 11:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Use your loaf, white Mother's Pride isn't racist, white pride as a label has been co-opted by racists so they're stuck with it. . . dave souza, talk 12:52, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi guys! This isn't a forum! Here we discuss reliable sources from news or academia which can improve the article. Ideally every thread started on this talk page should contain
 * a source containing something which can potentially be contributed to the article page.
 * some source which demonstrates that there's an error with the content on the page


 * You don't really need to discuss "points" or strategies for selecting sources which could introduce bias or personal views.


 * Happy editing!
 * Edaham (talk) 13:51, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed. It might be nice to simply close all discussions in the future which are not about either a specific article edit or a possible source. jps (talk) 14:46, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


 * isn't a forum states clearly that discussion should be purely kept to improving the article. Improving the article WAS the exact point of my OP : to advise the people who want to defend a certain POV (white pride isn't racist) on what kind of sources they should bring to the table. So isn't a forum is just inapplicable here, so is the request for closing discussions like this one. If there is a Wikipedia policy that requests providing a specific article to start a discussion, I request a link. Otherwise, what gives you the right to close discussions? Hamstergamer (talk) 09:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:CLOSE. jps (talk) 09:17, 4 April 2017 (UTC)


 * WP:CLOSE states "Any uninvolved editor may close most discussions, not just admins". jps seeing your previous post you clearly took sides so you're not 'uninvolved'. I think it's sad that unfounded closing requests hinder what should be free debate on how to improve the article and deal with an alleged bias. Hamstergamer (talk) 09:59, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Wrong website for "free debate"; this is not a forum. You're welcome to discuss specific proposals to improve the article, with sources, please restart that discussion below. . . dave souza, talk 10:28, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Why the hell can't you edit this?
This is extremely biased. Why can't anyone be proud to be white? Anymation (talk) 16:38, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Please see the FAQ at the top of this page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 19:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

White pride vs. black pride vs. gay pride
The first sentences ...

White Pride: "White pride is a motto primarily used by white separatist, white nationalist, neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations in order to signal racist or racialist viewpoints"

Black Pride: "Black pride is a movement in response to dominant white cultures and ideologies that encourages black people to celebrate black culture and embrace their African heritage."

Gay Pride: "Gay pride or LGBT pride is the positive stance against discrimination and violence toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people to promote their self-affirmation, dignity, equality rights, increase their visibility as a social group, build community, and celebrate sexual diversity and gender variance."

Any questions? I hate those evil white racist Nazis. -- Alexey Topol (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Please see the FAQ at the top of this page. - Edaham (talk) 14:08, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Irony, if it was intended, is not well-conveyed through typed text. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:14, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Not forum
 * The original post seemed to want to compare and draw attention to a disparity in the way the word "pride" is suffixed to create distinct terms. This disparity exists in the context in which it is used. This is reflected in the article and a FAQ has been extensively written to address this point.
 * Irony will definitely do nothing to provoke new thought on this subject or improve the article. This isn't a forum, something which shouldn't need to be constantly pointed out. Unless there's a specific edit suggestion posted in due course, suggest closing this thread and others like it without an ongoing discussion.
 * Edaham (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2017
This WIKIPEDIA post is patently racist in its description of anyone expressing white pride as a racist. Some may be, but wikipedia does not suggest that black lives matter or black panthers are racist even as they call for murdering whites. Emptycore (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Please see the FAQ at the top of the page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:44, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Be neutral when writing Wikipedia pages please.
It came to my attention that this page has been politicized and argumentative towards one side. Please avoid such actions to prevent targeted vandalism and hate speech. I'd suggest consulting to our Five Pillars for more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seagullimperial (talk • contribs) 01:05, 7 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Please see the FAQ at the top of the page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:45, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Offensive
Many white americans, as being seen and discussed on social media, find this offensive and extremely biased. I am one of those white americans. I have noticed that the public wants me to feel bad for being white or to degrade me for being white, or to inappropriately characterize me for being white. I love America and all of the people that live here. Most of us do. However, when comparing this to the pages of black pride, Asian pride, and such, I feel more of this negative stigma attached. This is bias, in a simple form. I teach my son to honor and value all lives. Wikipedia is a site that many use for general information. How can I recommend this to my son when he is being characterized by the same site negatively. There are bad apples declaring white pride, just like black pride and so on. I show my son their evil by pointing out their works. We live in an inclusive world that should uplift everyone because we know not the paths that they had to tread. I ask what did I do to earn this derision and be labeled like this? I want my son to hold his head up and be proud as he tries to compete as well as work with everyone else. Lrose111 (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.
 * additionally:
 * wp:soap
 * wp:notforum
 * wp:censored
 * wp:rs
 * and the FAQ at the top of this page.
 * cheers
 * Edaham (talk) 18:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Please read the FAQ at the top of the page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:16, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Edaham how about the entire page? It doesn't matter Lrose we can't be proud our race because if we are and talk about it we are racists! Don't buy into this shit, be proud of your white race, not racism... and they wonder why people become racist? :) ThePlane11 (talk) 23:29, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * not forum Edaham (talk)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 June 2017
Please change "is a motto primarily used by white separatist, white nationalist, neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations in order to signal racist or racialist viewpoints.[3][4] It is also a slogan used by the prominent post-Ku Klux Klan group Stormfront and a term used to make racist/racialist viewpoints more palatable to the general public who may associate historical abuses with the terms "white nationalist", "neo-Nazi", and "white supremacist"." Is a slogan that encourages white people to celebrate white culture and embrace their European heritage. Because all other "Pride" listings, except "White Pride", are of a positive light. This exception is highly racist. I am White and proud to be White, and this has NOTHING to do with hating anyone else. Joepete6018 (talk) 11:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Izno (talk) 12:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg not urbandictionary, cheers.Edaham (talk) 15:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Get used to it Joepete6018. You may aswell be racist because they are accusing us of it, by celebrating and being positive about our culture and heritage??? ThePlane11 (talk) 23:32, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2017
Change the definition of white pride to something less racist Everything.is.trash (talk) 20:26, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. nihlus kryik (talk) 20:29, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2017
This article should be edited to show that just because someone has "White Pride" does not make the person a racist. If the assumption that all persons who promote "White Pride" are racist then the assumption that all persons that promotes "Black Pride", "Asian Pride", "Native American Pride", etc. must be labeled in like articles as racist too. I'm very offended by this article which labels all "White Pride" advocates as racists. I have no problem when such is mentioned in this article as long as it is clearly noted that some hate groups use similar slogan to promote their agendas, while other groups or individuals simply use the term "White Pride" to only show their pride in their own heritage.

I propose that a separate paragraph be inserted after the introductory paragraph that clearly, without reservations states that the use of "White Pride" does not always indicate a racist slant anymore than all groups that promotes "Black Pride", "Asian Pride", "Native American Pride", etc. denotes racism.

Please make appropriate edits ASAP. Larrysharpsburg (talk) 21:14, 15 August 2017 (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. Note that Wikipedia forbids original research. Rivertorch   FIRE WATER   21:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2017
Compare desxription of white pride to black, gay and Asian pride titles and adjust so it is inline with similar titles description. 2602:306:B82C:A2A0:28BD:32F4:EC80:D478 (talk) 22:54, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * see FAQ above. Jytdog (talk) 23:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

deleted and reinstated comment
The article should have a new paragraph, something like the following:

While "White Pride" has been used to promote hate by certain supremacist groups such as the KKK and Neo-Nazi groups, it is clear the term is also used by many as a simple statement of "Pride" for one's heritage. If the assumption that all persons who promote "White Pride" are racist then the assumption that all persons that promotes "Black Pride", "Asian Pride", "Native American Pride", etc. must be labeled in like articles as racist too. Of course, one can not apply such to any group just because they express "Pride" in there heritage. It is therefore, important to keep in context how "White Pride" is use. I have no problem when such is mentioned in this article as long as it is clearly noted that some hate groups use similar slogan to promote their agendas, while other groups or individuals simply use the term "White Pride" to only show their pride in their own heritage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larrysharpsburg (talk • contribs) 19:41, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * - Regarding the deletion of the above comment. The above poster has a point. This post shouldn't have been deleted. In future please reply to, close or if really necessary (i.e. wp:notforum) collapse semi protected edit requests or edit proposals. It is very rare that a post requires immediate deletion. Exceptions include libelous material per wp:BLP and extremely offensive material or images. - Per the edit request/proposal:
 * ❌ Wikipedia can't contain your unsourced opinions about the origins or meaning of this term. Please read the faq. Edaham (talk) 05:21, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2017
I feel that white power is wrongly represented and not held as acceptable as Black power or Hispanic power. I feel it wrong to be labeled to be racist where as the before mentioned isn't. Therefore I believe I should be able to make some changes to it. Watcher87 (talk) 15:43, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Additionally, Wikipedia reflects how reliable sources treat topics and sometimes two semantically similar topics are treated very differently by sources. For example, compare misogyny to misandry. Most reliable sources treat the topic white pride as being most notable as a slogan used by white supremacists whereas sources indicate the other terms are used mostly to describe coherent social movements. Nihlus 16:02, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2017
Compare description of white pride to black, gay and Asian pride titles and adjust so it is inline with similar titles description.

Change entire first paragraph to read: white pride is used primarily by caucasion people of European extraction to celebrate their history and heritage.

Source https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pride

Source https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/white

https://theswamp.media/black-pride-white-pride — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:B82C:A2A0:28BD:32F4:EC80:D478 (talk) 00:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Source first hand account by Jared Brown 2602:306:B82C:A2A0:28BD:32F4:EC80:D478 (talk) 23:20, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * see FAQ above. Jytdog (talk) 23:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

❌ Not in accordance with RS or longstanding consensus (see FAQ). Fyddlestix (talk) 00:35, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The disproportionate treatment of the asian, black and white pride articles is ridiculous. Looks really messed up.  GregKaye 04:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see FAQ #1 at the top of this page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:38, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

White pride Vs Gay/Black/Asian
Please explain to me, using proper arguments, how gay pride, black pride and Asian pride are portrayed positively, whereas white pride is portrayed negatively... — Preceding unsigned comment added by NeoCy (talk • contribs) 04:07, October 11, 2017 (UTC)
 * ❌. That's not what we do here. The explaining-sociology-to-you department is another website entirely. This talk page is for discussing improvements to this specific article. You are free to rifle through the discussions and the FAQ at the top of the page if you want to review the hundreds of times this issue has been raised and discussed before. Additionally please sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes like this ~ . Edaham (talk) 09:14, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

In other words, the FAQ and those "reliable" outlets are full of shit. Either they're all racist movements or none of them are. Anything else is nothing but plain hypocrisy.OSB95 (talk) 17:22, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your opinion. But that's not helping this article at all.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 17:23, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I had the same question in mind. This discussion belongs on WP:RD; should I move it there? RedPanda25 15:59, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No. It's not the type of question RD can (or should) handle. It's also not a discussion that needs to be had here.  Each article is what they are because that's what reliable sources says about those subjects, and that's what we put in our articles. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:55, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Well firstly, it wasn't a question. It was a politely issued instruction, which I have already declined to carry out. Secondly as someone who displays the 'Metapedianism' badge on their user page you should know that your question regarding what is suitable for being (re)posted at project inquiry desks is far too 'meta-' for pages like this one, which deal with proposals for article improvements. Edaham (talk) 18:49, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree entirely, this discussion does not belong here. In addition, through some research, I have answered my own question. RedPanda25 23:36, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

White power
I notice that white power now redirects here, which, as a slogan is probably even more famous that "white pride". If we choose to discuss this subject here, we probably need an entire new section, and there is a paragraph on the coining of that term in the white nationalism article. In my opinion, the other term probably deserves its own article. There are certainly plenty of sources to be found on it. jps (talk) 20:41, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * These topics are so intertwined. I think it's okay to redirect here but it should be directly addressed if so.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 21:00, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems reasonable. The question is how to do that. Also, why, then, should "white pride" be the main article? There seem to be more sources on "white power" which has an older provenance coming out of Lew Rockwell nonsense. jps (talk) 01:23, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * My impression is that "white pride" is simply an attempt to deflect attention from what most of those folks actually are, which is white supremacists. That's what differs it from "black pride", which was an actual movement to encourage African-Americans to embrace their heritage, not camouflage for the radical black power movement. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:59, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, although I think the claim that black power movements were somehow "radical" in comparison to other civil rights initiatives is mostly based on white media hype rather than reliable sourcing, I think I see your point that there is a bit of asymmetry. On the other hand, it seems to me that "white pride" is a reactionary statement in the same way that "white power" is -- a direct false equivalence "rebranding" of civil rights messages (just like white lives matter is today). The larger idea of white supremacist appropriation of civil rights movement words could work as an overarching article idea. jps (talk) 12:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * When I refer to "radical" black power groups, I'm thinking of such groups as the Black Panthers and SNCC, as opposed to, say, Martin Luther King Jr.. Sure, the media loves a dichotomy to play up, but I think there's no doubt that those groups pretty much defined themselves in opposition to King's non-violent integrationist methods. My basic point, though, is as you say, that "white pride" is a "rebranding" (in marketing and advertising they would say "repositioning") of "white supremacy" or "white nationalism" in a way that "black pride" was not for "black power": Black pride was a distinct movement.  Sure, it had its separatist elements, but they were not predominant. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:03, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure the categorical separation of SNCC from the SCLC is editorially wise, but this is a separate issue. I think I agree with what you are saying here, BMK, but this would then imply that we probably should write two articles or an another article which doesn't preference one slogan over the other. "White supremacists slogans" for example? jps (talk) 15:31, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Workshop
I have little to no enthusiasm for writing more about the subjects of other slogans, but as long as the redirect is in place, I'm afraid we may not have a choice in the matter. There were people here saying that they thought the redirect of white power to this page is okay, but that we should have some explicit mention of it. I don't see how to do that in a readable way. Would there be any objection to making a "white power" article or changing the redirect back to white nationalism, for example (maybe with an anchor to the paragraph)? jps (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * In my view the redirect should go to white supremacy. i looked at the history of the redirect and it has flipped a lot over the years. The best thing to do would be probably be to hold an RfC on the Talk page of the redirect asking what page it should point to; one of the questions should be whether the page should be permanently protected so that it takes another RfC to change it.  How about that?   Would be easy to set up. Jytdog (talk) 19:00, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Fine with me! jps (talk) 21:11, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Great. Let's see if others here are OK with that... Jytdog (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * An RfC on the talk page seems like a good idea to me. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

New RfC
As per discussion above, a new RfC has been started: Talk:White_power. Please comment there. jps (talk) 13:50, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

New concerns about NPOV - with sources provided
First of all sorry for any mistakes, i'm a new user. I read some of the rules of wikipedia but it's not 100 % clear. So i didn't know where i should post this. BTW I read the FAQ and the parts of archives that treated the subject and i know this subject has been tackled many times but in my opinion this only points out the fact that this is not neutral so i searched for evidence since most of arguments have been said. So i ran into those articles which on the same principle as wikipedia made an article about white pride which is undeniably more neutral than this wikipedia page (abuse wiki and enacademic). Now i don't know if there is a clear define white pride movement (not associated with alt-right, racism etc ...) like gay/asian/ (...)/ pride however there is proof for individual that could form this group. (Here some youtuber's opinions while i know some may not be a good reference for a wikipedia's page (the first one however is kinda like a tertiary source though) i can use it to demonstrate what i wanted to : Rez please video, Lacy Jean video, Pathofcultivation video) (A council candidate differenciate white pride and white supremacy and the Huffington Post defines what white pride is) (from books : Democracy, and Fulfillment in the Era of Identity Politics: Principled Compromises in a Compromised World (look p.61 second paragraph), Contemporary voices of white nationalim in America (look p.5))

As I said above I didn't argue at all (but i can after if needed) because I felt like all the arguements have already been said in the archives. Took me some hours so I'd appreciate to have sincere thoughts about it and/or constructed replies. Draal (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * "Neutrality" is not a goal, WP:NPOV is. Neutrality would have us describe both sides of the claim that the Queen of England is a human-alien hybrid without stating that it is or is not true. NPOV has us state quite clearly what independent reliable sources have to say: the idea is nonsense on stilts.


 * WP:NPOV and WP:V are the heart of the issue here. We are trying to summarize what independent reliable sources have to say about the idea. That's where some of your sources are falling short. An "independent reliable source" is one from a publisher with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy that is independent from the subject. In the example I gave, sources close to the Queen or David Icke are not independent. Some guy on youtube does not have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.


 * In your list of sources, abuse wiki is another user-created site and cannot be used as a source. That their article is different from ours likely reflects that it has been edited by fewer (and different) editors. It likely started out as a copy of our article at some point in the past.


 * Enacademic is a mirror of Wikipedia. Their article is a copy of ours from some point in the past. No article on Wikipedia is ever "done". In theory at least, articles are being improved over time. What a Wikipedia article looked like one or more years ago is likely not up to our current standards. Here is where that site explains (in Russian) that the page is a copy from en.wikipedia.org.


 * I'm skipping the youtube videos. Anyone can post a video. Various candidates for public office can be found making statements supporting lots of ideas, ranging from completely rational to completely crazy.


 * The article from Huffington Post is not an article from Huffington Post. It is a blog (a self-published source) hosted on their domain. The blog posting is one woman's opinions.


 * In Democracy, and Fulfillment in the Era of Identity Politics: Principled Compromises in a Compromised World on page 61, I find the author discussing racial identity. I do not see him discussing "white pride" -- the slogan that is the topic of this article or as an idea (which this article is not about).


 * You link to Contemporary Voices of White Nationalism in America does not have a page 5. After the table of contents, it jumps to page 87. On the fifth page of the file, the author is interviewing white supremacist Jared Taylor about his white supremacist online magazine, American Renaissance. Taylor is not an independent reliable source for anything. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 14:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * So no reliable sources, ok my bad should have been more careful. However in Democracy, and Fulfillment in the Era of Identity Politics: Principled Compromises in a Compromised World on page 61, i linked this source because other pride is linked with its identity (here is the exemple of black pride : "Black pride is a movement in response to dominant white cultures and ideologies that encourages black people to celebrate black culture and embrace their African heritage"). Every pride being the same imo, though they are sometimes badly used and in the case of white pride that sometimes is often.


 * For the debate i have nothing more to add the discussion can be closed as far as i'm concerned.Draal (talk) 15:19, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


 * "Taylor is not an independent reliable source for anything." He is quoted extensively in the article about him: Jared Taylor; he is a reliable source there apparently. However he seems to be excluded from the "White pride" article entirely. On p. 103 of Contemporary voices of white nationalim in America the words "white pride" were used in a question by Russell K Nieli:


 * "Many of the white nationalist or white pride publications..."


 * Here the words are used synonymously with white nationalism. It also says (p 88):


 * "(Jared Taylor) vigorously opposes affirmative action policies that preference racial minorities, antidiscrimination laws that restrict private associational rights, and immigration policies that are shifting the racial demographics of America away from the previous white majority."


 * This is in conflict with the "Use as an identity marker" portion of the Wikipedia article, which says the words are an "appeal to a larger audience in hopes of inciting more widespread racial violence". The source makes the distinction of white pride/white nationalism dealing with political topics, not violence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomUser3510 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 19 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Taylor is not an independent reliable source for anything. Independent reliable sources are "independent" of the subject and "reliable" (they have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. We cannot cite him as a source for information other than as a primary source for very basic, non-controversial information about himself: where he was born (if undisputed), siblings, that kind of stuff (see WP:PSTS).
 * In an article about him, if reliable sources discuss his favorite color (or lack of color), we can quote what he said about the matter, citing a reliable source for his statement.
 * Taylor is neither independent nor reliable in this article or anywhere else, other than for very basic, non-controversial information about himself. Then the questions of relevance and weight would need to be addressed. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 15:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

FAQ about "X pride"
The comparison to misogyny and misandry is completely useless. Both those articles begin with "is the hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against ...". Meanwhile, the "X pride" articles are all strictly about positive racialist aspects, while this article is strictly about racist connotations. This article should do a better job separating the racist slogan from racialist aspects. Nergaal (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * The comparison might be more distracting than helpful, but I think you're missing the point. "Misogyny" and "misandry" are semantically similar to each other as terms. The lede naturally reflects these similarities, but then, following reliable sources, they diverge completely, because they are articles about different things. Likewise for this article, according to sources, there is no separation from the racist slogan and it's "racialist" aspects. As racialism points out, most dictionaries define the term racialism as synonymous with racism making this confusing at best and euphemistic at worst. It is not fair to these topics to pedantically treat them all exactly the same just because the terms are similar. Grayfell (talk) 21:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2018
For the explanation of "White Pride," I think it should be more in line with other "pride" explanations such as "Black Pride,"Asian Pride," etc:

"Black pride is a movement in response to dominant white cultures and ideologies that encourages black people to celebrate black culture and embrace their African heritage.[1] In the United States, it was a direct response to white racism especially during the Civil Rights Movement.[2] Related movements include black power,[2] black nationalism,[2] Black Panthers and Afrocentrism."

Such as: White pride is a movement in response to other various cultures and ideologies that encourages them celebrate their culture and embrace their heritage. In the United States, it is a direct response to racism especially during current history (2018). There are no related movements as White individuals believe in embracing all cultures equally and do not discriminate on the basis of race. Sjbooth549 (talk) 16:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC) — Sjbooth549 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Please read the FAQ at the top of this page. Neil N  talk to me 16:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


 * So it's OK to celebrate colonialism, slavery, and segregation? Ian.thomson (talk) 16:35, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm starting to think we should just redirect the talk page to the FAQ since there are rarely any discussions here that aren't explicitly addressed by it. clpo13(talk) 16:50, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2018
You need to either fix this page with all the untrue racism, or make the other pride pages just as politically correct, I dont see how you can have a Black Pride page, an Asian Pride Page, and A white Pride page, and have 2 of them completely differ from the other. Black pride has its racist groups but I dont see anyone putting information on that page about racist groups, Asian pride has gangmembers and racist groups yet no one wants to put up that information on there, and then white pride you have everything from neo nazis to the kkk. The information on this page is one sided, and it can be proven wrong that "white pride" isnt all about the kkk and white supremacist groups. Please note that white pride doesn't always refer to the KKK's white pride. This page pisses me off most because the word pride shouldn't even be in the title of this article it should just be titled Racist White Pride. 2602:30A:C0E7:8B20:5104:ACB3:B428:EFC4 (talk) 21:02, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * So it's OK to celebrate colonialism and slavery? Ian.thomson (talk) 21:07, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I absolutely agree that this page should be more in line with the other pride pages! If you want a page dedicated to white racists refer to white supremacy or white power. This page, and its authors, are being racist against Caucasian people. SarahLMB (talk) 21:53, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * So it's OK to celebrate colonialism and slavery? Ian.thomson (talk) 21:54, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * IMO there is undue weight towards inclusion of the white supremacy/neo-nazi beliefs, and not enough weight to the inclusion of other views. This resource Contemporary Voices of White Nationalism in America (page v) makes several distinctions of different views:
 * 1. White rights advocates
 * 2. White nationalism and white separatism
 * 3. White Christianity
 * 4. White Supremacy and Neo-Nazism


 * As I said earlier on this talk page Russell K Nieli is quoted saying:
 * "Many of the white nationalist or white pride publications..."


 * The Wikipedia article amalgamates these distinctions to give the impression that they are all the same. However in the resource white nationalism = white pride. The article only 86 words devoted towards the white nationalism part vs the entire rest of the article, which amounts to over 900 words. Here is the white nationalism section:
 * Political scientists Carol M. Swain and Russell Nieli, in their text on white nationalism, identify the idea of "white pride" as a relatively new phenomenon in the United States. They argue that over the course of the 1990s, "a new white pride, white protest, and white consciousness movement has developed in America". They identify three contributing factors: an immigrant influx during the 1980s and 1990s, resentment over affirmative action policies, and the growth of the Internet as a tool for the expression and mobilization of grievances. --RandomUser3510 (talk) 03:24, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Since Carol M. Swain and Russell Nieli are the editors of the book you cite above, you have essentially provided a single source for this POV. Please present evidence that this viewpoint is accepted by a broad consensus of mainstream scholars, and therefore is not a WP:FRINGE viewpoint. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The resource is included as a reference of the existing Wikipedia article. If it is fringe to say that white pride = white nationalism, the resource shouldn't be included in the first place and thus the entire section should be removed. --RandomUser3510 (talk) 03:38, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Nope, that's not the case. It's the specific vewpoint that you wish to include that I'm questioning, not factual matters. Please provide evidence that that viewpoint is widely accepted -- it's easy as pie to show that white pride = white nationalism" is.BTW, I'll note that some of the authors of the pieces in the book you recommend are David Duke, the former leader of the Ku Klux Klan; white supremacists Jared Taylor, Don Black and Matthew F. Hale; the self-described white separatist Michael H. Hart; Dan Gayman, the founder of the Christian Identity Church of Israel; and the white nationalist William Luther Pierce.  Citing any of them would not be acceptable either. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:45, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I opened the PDF to try and review your comments, and... this is about the table of contents? Oh please. What are we supposed to do with that? The part quoted in the article is not part of the PDF sample linked above. Taking a quote out of context is cherry-picking, and the full sentence was specifically about 'hostility towards Jews' as relates to Taylor. It was part of an interview question about this specific topic, and fixating on this kind of minutia is pedantic, at best, because we judge the entire source, not just the part someone found through hitting ctrl+f on part of the document.
 * If you have an actionable suggestion, make it. Otherwise this is yet another waste of time. Grayfell (talk) 04:03, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * OK I will take some actions then. --RandomUser3510 (talk) 05:31, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm sure you will. I said actionable suggestions. If you want to gain consensus on the talk page, first you will need to discuss specific changes, not vague 'humble opinions'. It is very likely that changes along the lines you are implying have already been discussed in excruciating detail already, so don't be surprised if controversial changes you make are reverted based on prior consensus. Grayfell (talk) 05:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * "Citing any of them would not be acceptable either" Why is citing them not acceptable? Quoting adherents to a belief set is not against Wikipedia policy or the many quotes attributed to the adherents of Flat Earth would not be allowed. --RandomUser3510 (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As with other WP:FRINGE adherents, these are not reliable sources. A source which analyzes a fringe movement might interview some of the movement's adherents, but Wikipedia cannot analyze these statements. We must allow reliable sources to form those conclusions. Picking and choosing among quotes from lengthy interviews is extremely subjective, because there are far, far too many quotes and many of them are contradictory or trivial. If a reliable source directly emphasizes a specific quote, it will do so for a reason which can be explained. If it doesn't, including the quote anyway would be cherry-picking. Grayfell (talk) 20:49, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As with other WP:FRINGE adherents, these are not reliable sources. But they are reliable sources on the Flat Earth article, or Lenin in the Communism article, of Constitutionalism article, etc. Why are these obscure quotes allowed on other articles but not here? These same quote restrictions that you say are not enforced on other articles, spanning from Flat Earth or other political articles.
 * We must allow reliable sources to form those conclusions That's what the resource Contemporary Voices of White Nationalism in America does. It provides an in-depth analysis on specific figures then interviews them: it isn't a contextless interview.
 * Picking and choosing among quotes from lengthy interviews is extremely subjective, because there are far, far too many quotes and many of them are contradictory or trivial. This same restriction is not applied to the other articles I mentioned. Lenin, Jeremy Waldron, and the various Flat Earthers all are quoted for a specific view they have. In exactly the same way, in Contemporary Voices of White Nationalism in America they are not cherry picked quoted out of context, but go into in-depth explanations.
 * I am not proposing an out of context quote from people in Contemporary Voices of White Nationalism in America but instead something from them, because the source describes them as being important figures in the movement. --RandomUser3510 (talk) 21:20, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * At a glance, I don't see any inappropriate quotes at flat earth, so I don't know, or particularly care, what quotes you're talking about elsewhere. See Other stuff exists. Those articles have their own talk pages with extensive discussions to determine consensus. This page is, however, the place to talk about this article.
 * The lone quote you've provided from Contemporary Voices...' isn't analyzing anything, and that solitary quote provides no depth at all. It's a cherry-picked line from an interview question. That interview is with a non-reliable person, and is a WP:PRIMARY source for information about that person. We are not obligated to provide something from unreliable fringe proponents, because that would be false balance. We are not here to provide "both sides", we are here to summarize information about this particular phrase. Grayfell (talk) 21:34, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that the specific quote be used, just an example. As for not using primary sources, I can accept that, despite it being an opposite standard than for the other articles I used. I guess the secondary source analysis in the Contemporary voices of white nationalim in America can be focused on instead.--RandomUser3510 (talk) 21:48, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The source is already used, and its conclusions about white pride are already summarized here. It appears that neither of us have access to the full source, but at a glance it doesn't appear to have a whole lot more to say. Again, this article is about the phrase white pride, not the many similar euphemisms used by white racists. Since this seems to be a common source of confusion, I'll clarify something: This source, taken as a whole, strongly appears to be just one of many which links the phrase to white supremacists. Wikipedia is based on reliable sources, not editor opinion, so undermining this connection is not appropriate. Grayfell (talk) 23:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

White Nationlists are coopting the "white pride" topic by showing similar Wikipedia articles on "gay pride" or "black pride" or "asian pride" etc.
This "white pride" article is offering a platform for the very white supremacists the article seems to criticize. The article should first introduce the notion that the "pride" term (added to an organized movement) is typically reserved for traditionally oppressed groups. By not explaining the 'oppression" narrative, this article is allowing those white supremacist to capitalize on the article in support of their own narrative that "white people" are being oppressed by black, or gay, or Asian peoples. The article should not be changed much at all -- other than to add this "oppression" explanation upfront and clearly state that there is nothing inherently wrong with "white pride" taking pride in their own heritage, but that to steal the term "Pride" for a group that has not been traditionally oppressed -- is a misappropriation and an attempt to undermine efforts of groups traditionally oppressed by white supremacists.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.120.54.52 (talk) 21:44, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * While I agree with your explanation, I don't see this stopping complaints as I see this prompting naive near-supremacists to just screech something about "SJW bias" and overt supremacists to complain that they really are somehow being oppressed by anything other than their own inbreeding and socio-political outlooks. Still, being able to revert any complaints under WP:NOTHERE instead of having to remind them of the past 500 years of Western history could be a more efficient use of our time.
 * There's also the issue of framing. We don't really start articles off with disclaimers.  We'd have to add a section explaining the "pride" concept and where "white pride" is distinct from other pride concepts, preferably as the first subsection.  This would have to avoid original research, so we'd have to cite and summarize professionally-published academic or at least journalistic sources that explicitly explain this distinction.  Then we'd have to re-write the intro to reflect the new body.  Ian.thomson (talk) 22:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

This article isn't here to criticize anyone, you biased wikipedian. It's here to state the facts. editor8778 22:26, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Who and what are you responding to in particular? Ian.thomson (talk) 00:15, 17 June 2018 (UTC)


 * "This "white pride" article is offering a platform for the very white supremacists the article seems to criticize." -editor8778
 * The rest of the post makes it pretty clear that OP is not saying white supremacism is a good thing. They point out how the article should frame white (supremacist) "pride" as distinct from other pride movements.  Ian.thomson (talk) 19:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Requested discussion
This edit adds material that is completely unsourced:

" Related terms are White power, used by neo-Nazi, white nationalist, white supremacist, and Ku Klux Klan (KKK) groups to express their beliefs analogous to black power, and Love Your Race, a slogan originally popularized by the National Alliance which hss been used by some groups. "

The cited source says:

"'Love Your Race' is a white supremacist slogan originally popularized by the neo-Nazi National Alliance. In white supremacist literature and fliers, the phrase is often accompanied by an idealized image of a beautiful and/or maternal white woman. It is often used as an indirect means of promoting the so-called 'Fourteen Words' slogan: 'We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.'"

The source does not mention "white pride" and is thus off-topic for this article. Additionally, it does not provide the link between the racist slogan, "white pride" and the unrelated, though similarly worded, concept, "black pride", the subject of substantial heat (by very little light) here. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 03:25, 10 July 2018 (UTC)


 * No comments? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 22:37, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry. As the editor who reverted your removal of the material, I've had another chance to examine the sources, and I agree that they do not support the statements made.  As such, I've restored the article to the state it was in when you removed the material. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:00, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Neutrality discussion
Hi All, I noticed this page was recently tagged for neutrality: and I agree that a discussion is necessary. This article clearly writes about White Pride with a negative overtone, while the articles Black pride, Gay pride and Asian pride have clear positive overtones. Why the negative attitude towards the white race? Political correctness, if you ask me! XP-93 (talk) 13:06, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Reliable sources describe white pride primarily as one of many false faces white supremacists, nazis etc. use to spread their racist garbage. Wikipedia articles echo reliable sources. Get it? PeterTheFourth (talk) 13:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

A quick Google search showed wide variance in the notion of what white pride is. I wonder how selective the writers of this article were in their choice of sources? XP-93 (talk) 13:15, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Please take a moment to read the FAQ that is posted at the top of this page, the numerous archives linked at the top of the page, and the multiple discussions listed above before discussing this. If you have something new to add, then please do that, but this page has gone through the cycle of "whataboutism" enough as it is. If fails to expand on their reasoning for adding the tag, or you fail to provide a new perspective on it, then the tag will be removed as it has been many times before.  Nihlus  13:21, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

If there is still a necessity for this page to go through “whataboutism,” then clearly consensus has not been reached on this issue, especially given the sheer number of editors who are unhappy with the way this article is written. XP-93 (talk) 14:35, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Don't confuse a loud vocal minority for a "sheer number of editors". This page is bound to be a lightning rod for those who disagree; however, we use reliable sources, which back the tone of the article. So again, please provide a new argument with reliable sources if you wish to have a discussion on the merits of the article. Nihlus  14:58, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

"Vocal Minority" aye? Strange... http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-white-pride-inherently-racist — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.235.94 (talk) 14:53, 2 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I see a random webpage attracted 20 people to comment on a question. I can find an internet forum with that many people agreeing that bacon is health food.


 * Yes, a vocal minority disagree. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 00:24, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have added context. Debate.org can be frustratingly hard to navigate. It had 20 comments, but many more unique ip addresses voted. Most people don't comment on that site, only vote. There's a few other directions you could go though. Such as the change.org petition. In all sincerity though, I wasn't trying to derail anything. It's just misleading to say vocal minority. It's technically a minority, but a large one (averaged out at around 44%). Anyway, that was my only point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.235.94 (talk) 02:42, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2018
EvanTeaches (talk) 23:09, 25 November 2018 (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. DannyS712 (talk) 23:13, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2018
I would like to add more sourses in order to better prove your point. I already listed some before I found out that your page was semi-protected. Aidenhall120 (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ❌ - This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. I would like to add more sourses is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".- MrX 🖋 16:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

discussion section for white pride/power removal and addition
noticed a call for discussion in the summaries which had not been answered here.

The text being reverted is in the opening statement: "White pride or White power is....". Should the phrase "White power" be removed or remain in the article? Edaham (talk) 09:45, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Stay inBeyond My Ken (talk) 21:51, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree - stay the addition of white power adds clarity and shows the reader a relationship between the way “white pride” is used and other ways in which the same sentiments are expressed. I.e. it adds contex and should stay. Edaham (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

In regards to white pride
There are two glaring problems with this entry.

The first is the assumption the concept of white pride is universal. The concepts in the article generally refer to the American version. The concept is quite different in many european countries, as well as in Asian and African.

The second, and possibly much more important issue, are the sources used. After studying, carefully, all sources provided I've noticed some issues. Around 90% of the sources used come from decidedly liberal, political institutions. Though many sources are in fact generally neutral, they are only quoting from a separate source. I believe this may be why, or at least I hope so. I also noticed that it seems the page actively avoids the neutral or semi-neutral accredited sources that have painted White Pride as a general term, used in some cases to promote racism, but in many others to promote pride in one's heritage. In fact, from my own research, for every source that describes White Pride as racism, another describes it as innocent pride in one's self. (I should mention as well, every "pride" movement has a racist version).

I would have added a paragraph to point this out, with the roughly 100 sources from universities, studies, etc included, but of course the page is protected. Which is something else that bothers me. White Pride seems to be the only "pride" page protected. It honestly creates the image of a political agenda. Preventing any dissenting belief, regardless of how well sourced, from being added, when other pages allow the open editing, is disturbing from a company that is supposed to be neutral in it's presentation of information. I've seen this trend for quite some time. Generally speaking, Liberal ideologies tend to permeate the site, actively silencing dissenting views, regardless of how well supported those views may be. Only in the most extreme of cases have I see a wikipedia page accurately depict certain topics in a neutral light. This isn't to cause tension, just honest criticism of the practices of the site. I easily could be wrong. Though, I find it unlikely that I am.

Take care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.235.94 (talk) 14:40, 2 September 2018 (UTC)


 * If you would like to make a change to a protected article without creating a user account and amassing a few edits, you can create an edit request and another user can make the change on your behalf. However, you should provide reliable sources to back up any claims you would like to add to the article. Original research is not permitted. Also, please be mindful to keep your comments on the topic of improving the article. Wikipedia is not a forum for discussing off-topic subjects such as what biases Wikipedia as a whole may be subject to. Hope that helps. --ChiveFungi (talk) 21:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

That actually helps quite a bit! Thank you so much for your help! I didn't even know edit requests were a thing. Also, wont be problem ^^. Most of my sources are historical, repeated surveys, or studies backed by mountains of research. I think one or two may be original research though, will make sure to omit those. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.235.94 (talk) 02:46, 3 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Fantastic. Hopefully compiling those sources will provide some distraction from vandalizing other areas of the encyclopedia. Edaham (talk) 11:09, 21 November 2018 (UTC)


 * That IP is a mobile connection. The vandalism and comments here are about a year apart and aren't likely to be the same person. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 02:35, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * oops! My bad. Knee-jerk reaction. Sorry for the lack of wp:AFG. Edaham (talk) 02:57, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Request to have the page edited
Hello, I am requesting that the article on “white pride” be edited. I would ask that the author consider that “white pride” in itself is, in this article, unfairly conflated with racist, supremacist beliefs; other articles such as “Asian pride” and “Black pride” have a positive tone to them. One of the author’s previous responses to such a request was that white pride was a defense of colonialism and other bloodbaths. However, pride in one’s race does not nessecary signify a defense of violence. All the races should be treated with equal regards and respect, and I and many others believe that this article is unfair and in need of editing. Thank you for your understanding and please consider my request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlowUrbano (talk • contribs) 03:14, 27 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Please see the FAQ at the top of the page. You may also find White people informative. The term "white race" started being used in the 17th century specifically because of slavery. When people say "black", they are usually talking about something very different, so comparing these two things is misleading. Be proud of yourself and your heritage, be it Spanish, Black, Puerto Rican, Latvian, Czech or whatever. When you say "white pride" you're just using a term invented by neo-Nazis to rustle jimmies. Grayfell (talk) 04:45, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

When you say "white pride" you're just using a term invented by neo-Nazis to rustle jimmies.

Of course, that is your OPINION. It is my opinion that pride movements glorifying other races besides white are also indicative of racist sentiment by the same token, no equivocation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.215.156.9 (talk) 06:38, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * K. Grayfell (talk) 06:57, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * We pointedly do not say the phrase is "bad". We say what reliable sources say. It is "an expression primarily used by white separatist, white nationalist, neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations in order to signal racist or racialist viewpoints." Do many people think white supremecists, etc. and their racist viewpoints are "bad"? Sure, but that's not relevant here. If reliable sources said that about black pride, etc., you might have a point. They don't so you don't. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 17:57, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree. Goldrushjv (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2018
why dont you define this the same way you do black pride and gay pride and every other king of pride. seems like you are the bigot against white people! 2603:3003:1500:6F0:582C:E4DD:B2F8:4A14 (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2018 (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. DannyS712 (talk) 22:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Also, see the FAQ at the top of the page. Grayfell (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

well every other race is allowed to have pride such as black pride, gay pride, asian pride etc. by sourcing radical left wing studies that baldly assert that white pride is somehow racist as opposed to any other expression of pride comes across as pretty biased.

how about something common sense and plainly written, like:

"White pride is a movement in response to the developments of the anti-white movement and ideologies, that encourages white people to celebrate their heritage. Pride, as opposed to shame and social stigma, is the predominant outlook that people of all colors should enjoy, even white people.96.246.155.171 (talk) 02:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The first part of the requested edit needs WP:reliable sources to back it up. The second part is not neutral (especially the "should enjoy") and thus won't be included. I suggest reading the FAQ at the top of the page. --DannyS712 (talk) 02:53, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

The FAQ just doubles down on the double standard, this source that was cited (2, specifically) simply baldly asserts that the conscious pursuit and celebration of whiteness is explicitly racist, with no further justification. This statement would work fine if whiteness was substituted with blackness, why is it explicitly racist? the writer of this source doesn't even feel the need to explain that. I think its a bad source, The other source (3) is a book as well, I guess I would have to track it down and buy it in order to see if it makes a fair argument or not, I wonder who is Sarah Van McVey and why does this source carry so much weight though? Again, not a very good source.96.246.155.171 (talk) 03:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The problem is an historical one. Historically, at least in the West, the white race has been the dominant one, and has oppressed, enslaved and exploited other races for the benefit of the overclass, so "white pride" carries with it a sort of nostalgia for when the whites ran things, and everyone else bowed down to them.  This implication doesn't connect with "black pride", which has (or had) an entirely different function: to restore black awareness of their heritage and abilities.So, yes, in the West the "pursuit and celebration of whiteness" is indeed quite often racist -- much of the time explicitly (blatantly so), but even when not, implicitly.  It's simply not a symmetrical circumstance, for historical reasons. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:30, 17 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Well said. Further, the Whitewash source from 2002 does explain its position in depth. For example, it explains the phrase's connection to neo-Nazi label Resistance Records, and also criticizes the SPLC for focusing on "white pride" organizations like the KKK at the expense of other, more  implicit forms of racism. Those sources are a small sample of what's available which explains this racist history and the term's mostly racist modern usage.
 * For simplicity, I'll repeat something I said previously:
 * You may also find White people informative. The term "white race" started being used in the 17th century specifically because of slavery. When people say "black", they are usually talking about something very different, so comparing these two things is misleading. Grayfell (talk) 03:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Is it not possible for a white person to be proud of their heritage without being racist? Surely we can find a way to express that without invoking some term used by a hate group at some point in history.96.246.155.171 (talk) 04:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * As I've already said more times than I can count, find reliable sources and go from there. We are not interested in examples of white people being proud of being white. There are many reasons that won't work.
 * Here's a (controversial) perspective that might help you understand this. Black people's identities have been formed, in part, specifically because their ancestors were grouped together through slavery and oppression. This is only one part of the African diaspora. If it weren't for these centuries of racism, we might only be talking about Angolan Pride and Bantu Pride and Tuareg Pride, etc. The history of "Black pride" is specifically recognizing these complexities, and the complex history of racial categorization imposed by scientific racism. Black pride is embracing this and reclaiming it as a source of cultural strength. Is this something you want to subvert by pretending that "white pride" must be treated exactly the same? The history of "white pride" is completely different.
 * Again, as I've said before, if you want to be proud of being Basque or Czech or Polish or German or Italian or Irish or British or whatever, you shouldn't care what Wikipedia says, but if you want to tell everyone else you're proud of being white, you should make damn sure you know what "white pride" actually means, and that's the purpose of this article. The term "white pride" was popularized by racists specifically to sow confusion, and many knowledgeable people who hear it know this. If you don't know this because the Wikipedia article feeds you misleading information, and then use it anyway, that's a problem, isn't it? Grayfell (talk) 04:29, 17 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I am not trying to subvert anything, This isn't about me personally, I am asking if white people can be proud, and can there be an article, or even a subset of an article that expresses that concept without any racist implications.96.246.155.171 (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2019 (UTC)


 * What, exactly, is this concept? The concept of white people being proud of their race, but not in a racist way? Why would that be worth discussing in an encyclopedia? As I already said, find reliable sources discussing this concept and let's see what they have to say, but the "concept" isn't as clear-cut as you seem to be implying. Grayfell (talk) 04:50, 17 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I think you put white pride in quotations, as you are only considering it in the context of a hateful slogan, and not in the literal meaning of the words. Historically, white people in the west are a mixed bag like everyone else. That said there are plenty of good things that they can be proud of that are just as historically significant as the shameful racist parts no?96.246.155.171 (talk) 04:26, 17 January 2019 (UTC)


 * If you have need of being proud of something beside your own attributes, achievements and morality, you can always be proud of your ethnic heritage ("white" is not an ethnicity; "Irish", "Italian", "Scottish", "Polish", "Swedish", "Greek", and "English" are examples of ethnicities), or your nationality, or even your locality (city, state, county, whatever).Many of us here in the United States who are usually very proud of our country for its revolutionary system of government and the great things the country has done -- while at the same time acknowledging the bad things as well -- are having a difficult time in the past few years, because our elected leader has behaved so poorly and represents so many of the things that we are not proud of. We want to be proud again, but will probably have to wait until the system corrects its mistakes.In the same way, "White pride" may well become a more neutral concept sometime in the future, but right now it's intrinsically linked to those historical iniquities I mentioned above, and will remain so in the foreseeable future. For the time being, when someone says "white pride", people are not going to think of the great heritage of Western civilization, they're going to think neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan.  And that's no coincidence: white separatists, white supremacists and white nationalists have worked very hard to use "White pride" as a term meant to camouflage their real views with the "white pride is the same as black pride" analogy.  It's unfortunate, but true, that many people are being duped by this, and are unaware (or choose not to hear) the historical reality behind the expression. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC)


 * One last thing, you've been indulged here, on the good faith assumption that you're serious about these issues and are not simply trolling us. Whichever it is, though, we've gone far afield into WP:NOTAFORUM territory; that is, an article's talk page is not a place to discuss the subject in general, its function is to allow discussion of how to improve the article.  I'm afraid I'm going to have to insist that all additional discussion be limited to that - how to improve the article - and any general discussion will be deleted or collapsed. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:55, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

This isn't about me. There is no necessity in any of the other articles for people of any other race or creed to narrow ones heritage down to a specific country, why is it a requirement for whites? Generally I think all those racist things are more associated with "white power" than white pride, but if those two words are so tainted as to be unusable, lets give it a different title, it doesn't matter as long as the message is the same.96.246.155.171 (talk) 05:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I can't believe you're asking why black Americans don't assert pride in their specific tribe or ethnic group. (Country is a Western concept which has little relevance to a African American's background.)  I'll say this once, and once only.


 *  THEY CAN'T DO THAT BECAUSE THEY WERE CAPTURED, PACKED INTO BOATS, TAKEN TO THE NEW WORLD, AND HAD ANY CONNECTION WITH THEIR FORMER LIVES ERASED .


 * They were fucking slaves, hadn't you heard that?


 * So, yes, at this point it is very much about you and your ignorance, so I'm disengaging before I pop a cork and say something that will get me blocked. I will say -- for the benefit of any other readers -- that "White power" is only marginally better than "white pride" because its marginally more honest, which is why White power redirects to White supremacy. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:15, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

"Not a forum"
Please note at the very top of the page where it says:


 * This page is not a forum for general discussion about White pride. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article.

Because of past incidents, this page is on a short leash. Any discussion which is not directly about improving the article is likely to be deleted, collapsed, or archived.

Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * * Discriminatory and racist against a particular ethnic group? Check ✔
 * * Use decade+ pictures of thuggish monster skinheads painting a horrible negative immediate impression of the article? Check ✔
 * * Use most of the article to cover up what the white nationalist perspective says? Check ✔
 * Great article guys. I am glad there is a literal cabal of left-leaning editors who monitor this article 24/7 with 10,000-100,000+ edits behind them with huge influence to lock discussions and ban users on the spot. This article should be an example all other articles should strive for. RandomUser3510 (talk) 04:52, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

This is NOT A FORUM
Please note at the very top of the page where it says:


 * This page is not a forum for general discussion about White pride. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article.

Because of past incidents, this page is on a short leash. Any discussion which is not directly about improving the article is likely to be deleted, collapsed, or archived. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:09, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If we're not allowed to talk about the article, then what are we allowed to do? --RandomUser3510 (talk) 01:39, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Is this a serious question, or are you trolling? You are allowed to talk about how to improve the article. It ain't that complicated. Grayfell (talk) 02:12, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * OK --RandomUser3510 (talk) 03:26, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Misleading
This page is part of the movement to DECREASE discrimination! It is evident that this article is written with a clear bias that does not reflect the spectrum of meanings of "White Pride." In this case, the article portrays having White Pride as a racist activity and unfairly construes white people as racist. While, of course, racism should be included in this article, it should also discuss the celebration of being a white person. I am a white male and I do have pride in my heritage and genetic history. While "Black Pride," "Gay Pride," and "Asian Pride" all discuss the celebration of the race/idea, "White Pride" is the only article that condemns those who practice it. I ask that an Administrator or more experienced user take action to correct this article rather than have it contain a racist, discriminatory, and misleading set of information that poorly reflects on the Wikipedia community. While the FAQ simply uses "reliable sources" as the excuse, it isn't fair to assume that the majority is correct. Instead of solely focusing on a small score of reliable sources, include ALL opinions that can be found from reliable sources which would show the celebration of white heritage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jefrafra (talk • contribs) 20:49, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Please check out WP:TRUTH.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 21:05, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * This article was clearly written ignoring many reliable sources. It is not factual, misleading, and unfair to only use sources that support one point without even mentioning the other. Racism and white supremacy should absolutely be covered in this article, alongside European heritage and persons who are legitimately proud to be Caucasian. Jefrafra (talk) 19:24, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * "Black pride" and "Gay pride" were reactions to historical oppression. White people aren't being oppressed, so that excuse goes out the window.  "White Pride" was developed by white supremacists to whitewash their anti-human beliefs in an attempt to make them more palatable for the gullible
 * Either stop trying to promote a white pride agenda (and find something else to do) or leave. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:48, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * @ian.thomson White people have also suffered slavery and oppression. In fact, in many African and Islamic countries, white people are still enslaved. I am not promoting or encourage white supremacy or racism- I am simply a proud white male and believe this article should reflect the several meanings of white pride (which would include a variety of reliable sources rather than the single-sided ones used). Jefrafra (talk) 22:43, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Alright, I need to say something. I find it completely unfair how a lot of comments that address legitimate problems with the article are deleted under "wikipedia is not a forum" even though they are talking about the article, not the subject. It really is time to fix the article, the fact that people complain about it almost every week should be a sign this article needs fixing. There is absolutely nothing racist about being proud of how you were born. It's only racist if you think white people are superior. This article is unfairly biased. Of course there is nothing I personally can do to fix that, since I lack knowledge on the subject. But think of it like this, do you really want people to think of this as one of the worst articles on the site? That's not something you want people to think. The articles are meant to be at a good quality, right? Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 15:47, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Please see the FAQ at the top of the page. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 23:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I did address the FAQ in my previous suggestions. Using sources is excellent, but we can't pick and choose reliable sources to promote a certain ideal. As previously stated, racism is a topic at hand, as is the basic pride I have in being a white person. I shouldn't be considered a white supremacist, as the Administrator (Ian) put it, because I believe this article should consider the reliable sources that discuss the history of white oppression and why I'm proud to be a white person.[REDACTED](redacted after I realized it was not relevant to the article nor the proper place to address this issue) Jefrafra (talk) 04:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * You have not included any reliable sources at all. Those sources would have to be reliable, and specifically discuss "white pride". Sources which only discuss white oppression are not useful here, because that would be WP:SYNTH. Grayfell (talk) 04:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2019
White pride, is a expression primarily used by white nationalist, that take pride in being white. White Power has been associated with neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations in order to signal racist or racialist viewpoints.[2][3] It is also a slogan used by the prominent post-Ku Klux Klan group Storm front and a term used to make racist/racialist viewpoints more palatable to the general public who may associate historical abuses with the terms "white Power", "neo-Nazi", and "white supremacist". But not all white nationalist have this view point. Recon16g (talk) 12:35, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * ❌ - This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".- MrX 🖋 16:39, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion for this page's FAQ above
What_Wikipedia_is_not. Please address this important wikipedia principle with more FAQ points to include why this article isn't a newspaper, soapbox, publisher of original thought, guidebook, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.187.176.47 (talk) 11:07, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

More content
Here is an article that presents a broader view of the phrase, and relates it to the Alt Right
 * "calls among many alt-righters for white Americans to regain a sense of racial identity and “white pride” is effectively a rebellion against neoliberal market forces that erode tribal loyalties, national bound-aries, and cultural uniqueness by encouraging open borders, multiculturalism, and individualistic forms of agency associated with competition and consumerism"

- ; PDF - RandomUser3510 (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

OK to be white
The link to the "It's OK to be white" page denotes it as an alt-right slogan, when the page itself points out its origin and continued use as social artwork (similar to, as an example, Martin Firrell's works). Really, it's just an unnecessary addition to the link (and the only link with extra text), unless there's some other "It's OK to be white" page that requires it to be differentiated in some way. I suggest removing the extraneous text.73.98.155.8 (talk) 02:56, 31 January 2020 (UTC)


 * No. As that article explains, "It's OK to be white" was coined by a white power music group, later popularized via 4chan, and has been most frequently associated with white supremacist trolls and overt neo-Nazis. Summarizing this by saying it's an alt-right slogan is entirely appropriate. Grayfell (talk) 03:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 March 2020
White Pride, like any other sense of pride, is a term used by the Caucasian race to describe the sense of accomplishments pertaining to the development of society, technology, economy etc. Jason Knowles (talk) 05:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * ❌ - A dictionary definition of "pride" has no relevance to the commonly understood (and properly sourced) definition of "white pride". - MrX 🖋 11:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2020
please add that “white pride” saying is used by some Racist groups that are specifically against white peoples Showing that they can not be proud of their heritage because people that are not white will not let them. 2600:1008:B022:5757:CB1:D224:3536:42CC (talk) 14:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Not without sources meeting WP:RS. Doug Weller  talk 14:33, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2020
In the "See also" section of this article, there is a link to another Wikipedia page about a slogan "It's OK to be white". The slogan is described as "an alt-right slogan". This description should be removed as it is not backed by any sources and the Wikipedia page about it does not even contain the word "alt-right". 2001:999:20A:1056:E7C3:2676:8F53:9F27 (talk) 14:26, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Nope. If you have issues with that article, it should be taken up there.  7&amp;6=thirteen (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 14:29, 23 June 2020 (UTC)