Talk:Yaphank, New York

Reverted edit about difficulties non-white non-Germanic people face in buying property
I added the following yesterday to this article: In spite of all this, it remains technically impossible to buy a house there unless you are Aryan and of Germanic roots, as demonstrated by a recent court case brought by a Mr and Mrs Kneer, who wished to sell their house recently. Reference:

This was swiftly reverted by User:John_from_Idegon with the note that it needed a better source.

While not personally a fan of the Daily Mail, it's still one of the UK's main newspapers, founded in 1896, it has over 2,000,000 readers, making it the fourth-largest circulation of an English-language newspaper in the world. When you consider online, it is third English language newspaper in the world (following the Guardian and the New York Times), with 55.8 million unique users per month (source: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/oct/21/the-guardian-overtakes-new-york-times-in-comscore-traffic-figures)

I was therefore assuming that the source is more than good enough?

In any case, I have found this from the New York Times: 

I am therefore putting my paragraph back in, but am adding the reference to the New York Times as well. I trust that this will be acceptable! Tris2000 (talk) 16:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Put together, the two sources you cite invalidate your edit. People bought a structure situated on the property of a club. They did not buy the land, only the structure. When they bought it, they were required to join the private club and abide by its rules. They signed a legal agreement to that effect. There is nothing pertaining to real estate at all. This is clearly a personal property transaction and the Fair Housing Act does not apply.


 * But really, that isn't important either. This is a news story, or more accurately, a non news story. NOTNEWS covers the story. Your edit, additionally, fails NPOV. John from Idegon (talk) 02:47, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
 * , the sources provided by an anonymous editor and Tris2000 in October 2015 – New York Times, New York Post, Telegraph – were perfectly acceptable; even the Daily Mail article was highly informative. Whether there was a violation of the Housing Act or not is not for you to decide if that's what the papers report. As to your argument WP:NOTNEWS, you might want to consider this article in the Washington Post from 19 May 2017: "'Hitler Street' and swastika landscaping: A New York enclave's hidden Nazi past" by Cleve R. Wootson Jr., which clearly demonstrates that there is enduring interest in Camp Siegfried and its legacy. I suggest this article needs to reflect that. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)