User talk:Butlerblog/Archives/2023/November

The Signpost: 20 November 2023
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Articles labelling neo nazi
If there is evidence via articles labelling a far-right activist as a neo nazi as well as a confirmed relation to neo nazis, doesn't that contradict the BLP policy of not listing alt right politicians and acrivists as neo nazis? Fuentes is described as a neo nazi in a couple of the sources listed and has associated with neo nazis. Firekong1 (talk) 22:54, 24 November 2023 (UTC)


 * There's a lot to unpack there. First, this really should be discussed on the article talk page, since it is more specific to the Nick Fuentes article, so feel free to move all of this there is you wish, but I'll answer you here.
 * "confirmed relation to neo nazis" / "has associated with neo nazis" - If I was pro-life and associate with American Life League, that doesn't make me Catholic, does it? (Just to be clear, that's rhetorical - it doesn't.) Association does not make one a neo-Nazi. It just means you share a common interest.
 * "doesn't that contradict the BLP policy of not listing alt right politicians and acrivists as neo nazis?" - I'm not sure what policy you're referring to (anytime you reference a policy, it's helpful to identify that specific policy), but I can think of several that need to be considered. Per WP:BLPSTYLE: Do not label people with contentious labels, loaded language, or terms that lack precision, unless a person is commonly described that way in reliable sources. Instead use clear, direct language and let facts alone do the talking.  That doesn't mean you can't use a contentious label, but it does mean that you need to have more than just cursory support for it.  Generally, it's best to use attribution in an article, especially a BLP, when using a contentious label so that it is attributed to the source (e.g. "[name of source] has noted that [name of subject] is a neo-Nazi.").  However, all of that aside, you're talking in speculative generalities, because the edits I objected to are categorization.  The Fuentes article does not describe him as a neo-Nazi.  Per WP:BLPCAT (emphasis added): the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text.  That standard of measure has not been met.  There are other categorization policies that would also apply, but there's really no need to list them as these two pretty much cover the current sitation.
 * Butler Blog  (talk) 19:19, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for explaining, I’ll move this discussion to the talk page and specify what I meant. I just wanted to let you know that I’m not attempting to start an edit war, I just have a genuine interest on editing articles which may not be viewed by others in the same way as I view it. Firekong1 (talk) 21:10, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I just have a genuine interest on editing articles which may not be viewed by others in the same way as I view it - That's fine, and that's exactly what I assumed about you. But you have to be able to leave your personal POV at the door and make sure you're editing following WP:NPOV. That doesn't mean avoiding or not using value-laden labels; it just means that it must be used correctly (which also means it fits correctly when used, otherwise omitted), especially in a WP:BLP article, regardless of your personal feeling on the matter.   Butler Blog   (talk) 15:13, 28 November 2023 (UTC)