Jump to content

Talk:Alternative for Germany: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Alternative for Germany/Archive 5) (bot
Line 30: Line 30:


I dispute calling the AfD “ultranationalist” in the ideology section of the article. There are two reasons to this. Firstly, the source provided consists of one sentence of a Washington post article that happens to refer to the AfD as “ultranationalist”. Secondly, the source itself may not in this scenario be trustworthy, the Washington post is known to typically hold a bias that favors the left in their reporting, and since this is the only known instance of the AfD being called ultranationalist, this could be just another product of that. While I can admit that the AfD May nave ultranationalist factions that could be discussed elsewhere in the article, the ideology section is not the place to do it. [[User:Victor Salvini|Victor Salvini]] ([[User talk:Victor Salvini|talk]]) 00:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
I dispute calling the AfD “ultranationalist” in the ideology section of the article. There are two reasons to this. Firstly, the source provided consists of one sentence of a Washington post article that happens to refer to the AfD as “ultranationalist”. Secondly, the source itself may not in this scenario be trustworthy, the Washington post is known to typically hold a bias that favors the left in their reporting, and since this is the only known instance of the AfD being called ultranationalist, this could be just another product of that. While I can admit that the AfD May nave ultranationalist factions that could be discussed elsewhere in the article, the ideology section is not the place to do it. [[User:Victor Salvini|Victor Salvini]] ([[User talk:Victor Salvini|talk]]) 00:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
:So you want to whitewash that description, or at the least move that ideology out of the ideology section... because a source that describes them as such, a top of the line source i might add, is biased in your view? This is a far-right extremist party with strong ultranationalist overtones and dogwhistles. Are there any proper sources that actually dispute the description? [[Special:Contributions/2003:D6:2729:FF5A:5D0A:674C:2DC7:60DE|2003:D6:2729:FF5A:5D0A:674C:2DC7:60DE]] ([[User talk:2003:D6:2729:FF5A:5D0A:674C:2DC7:60DE|talk]]) 17:22, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:22, 13 October 2019

Leftist biased

on the opening section is very clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:A040:19B:214D:DDDC:5C9:5BBB:9E08 (talk) 01:29, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The article is not written from a neutral perspective and rather from someone who prefers to hurt this party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.226.82.38 (talk) 01:13, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Reality has a well known liberal bias" (Colbert). Should you have something more concrete to criticise, feel free to provide some reliable sources in support of your claim. Cheers  hugarheimur 17:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I raise in support of this issue. Left-wind liberals are all over AfD across multiple-language versions of party's articles. The Russian version just resolved an issue with a "Racist" tag and there are still talks of putting more stress on xenophobia and anti-Islam movement. I urge support of Wiki administration for the neutrality. Wikipedia is not a field of political battle and not the left-wing administred resource. By writing and editing biased posts on German politics authors are doing one thing and one thing only - mocking Germany in the face of the world community! 94.25.169.65 (talk) 20:39, 10 August 2019 (UTC)Wolf3319[reply]

“Ultranationalism” in ideology section

I dispute calling the AfD “ultranationalist” in the ideology section of the article. There are two reasons to this. Firstly, the source provided consists of one sentence of a Washington post article that happens to refer to the AfD as “ultranationalist”. Secondly, the source itself may not in this scenario be trustworthy, the Washington post is known to typically hold a bias that favors the left in their reporting, and since this is the only known instance of the AfD being called ultranationalist, this could be just another product of that. While I can admit that the AfD May nave ultranationalist factions that could be discussed elsewhere in the article, the ideology section is not the place to do it. Victor Salvini (talk) 00:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So you want to whitewash that description, or at the least move that ideology out of the ideology section... because a source that describes them as such, a top of the line source i might add, is biased in your view? This is a far-right extremist party with strong ultranationalist overtones and dogwhistles. Are there any proper sources that actually dispute the description? 2003:D6:2729:FF5A:5D0A:674C:2DC7:60DE (talk) 17:22, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]