Talk:Angel Families: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 129.49.100.7 - "" |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
I don't think this article can be neutral without some discussion of the racism underlying this term. However we choose to frame that- and for such a divisive issue I'll leave it to more experienced editors- ignoring the fact that "Angel families" is essential a white supremacist propaganda phrase used to fearmonger is not a neutral decision. Undocumented immigrants are not more violent than other groups in the United States- in fact they're statistically less violent- and the spotlight shone on violent crimes committed by undocumented immigrants is a political propaganda tool. The way this article is currently framed is like if the article on Blood Libel didn't make it clear that Blood Libel is an antisemitic myth. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.49.100.7|129.49.100.7]] ([[User talk:129.49.100.7#top|talk]]) 16:59, 15 December 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
I don't think this article can be neutral without some discussion of the racism underlying this term. However we choose to frame that- and for such a divisive issue I'll leave it to more experienced editors- ignoring the fact that "Angel families" is essential a white supremacist propaganda phrase used to fearmonger is not a neutral decision. Undocumented immigrants are not more violent than other groups in the United States- in fact they're statistically less violent- and the spotlight shone on violent crimes committed by undocumented immigrants is a political propaganda tool. The way this article is currently framed is like if the article on Blood Libel didn't make it clear that Blood Libel is an antisemitic myth. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/129.49.100.7|129.49.100.7]] ([[User talk:129.49.100.7#top|talk]]) 16:59, 15 December 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
In the meantime, I'm removing the "examples" section. It's gratuitous and unnecessary. Wikipedia isn't a propaganda outlet. Those incidents are only notable because of how they've been used by racists to inspire hatred against latinos. Their inclusion, as currently framed, is not balanced. |
|||
Revision as of 17:05, 15 December 2019
Neutrality tag
Hello, I added the neutrality tag more as a formality than anything. With an article this short, its hard to maintain a balanced perspective on recent political events/terms. Additionally I have changed "killed" to "allegedly killed" in the Piña case, as the accused has not been convicted. Xevus11 (talk) 01:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
I don't think this article can be neutral without some discussion of the racism underlying this term. However we choose to frame that- and for such a divisive issue I'll leave it to more experienced editors- ignoring the fact that "Angel families" is essential a white supremacist propaganda phrase used to fearmonger is not a neutral decision. Undocumented immigrants are not more violent than other groups in the United States- in fact they're statistically less violent- and the spotlight shone on violent crimes committed by undocumented immigrants is a political propaganda tool. The way this article is currently framed is like if the article on Blood Libel didn't make it clear that Blood Libel is an antisemitic myth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.49.100.7 (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
In the meantime, I'm removing the "examples" section. It's gratuitous and unnecessary. Wikipedia isn't a propaganda outlet. Those incidents are only notable because of how they've been used by racists to inspire hatred against latinos. Their inclusion, as currently framed, is not balanced.