Talk:Curtis Yarvin

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography Stub‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Neoreactionary

Does Yarvin describe himself as a neoreactionary? As he himself has noted, we should not describe people using terms they don't call themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.184.156.243 (talk • contribs)

There's buckets of third-party sources for the label, which is quite sufficient for Wikipedia; though if he hasn't self-labeled with it then we should note that too - David Gerard (talk) 10:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He notes here:

If I had to choose one word and stick with it, I'd pick "restorationist." If I have to concede one pejorative which fair writers can fairly apply, I'll go with "reactionary." I'll even answer to any compound of the latter - "neoreactionary," "postreactionary," "ultrareactionary," etc.

so it's not a self-label, but not one he deeply objects to FWIW - David Gerard (talk) 10:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that he would accept any label that had already been applied to any other person, maybe not even one that was invented by any other person. If nothing else, he wants to be seen as unique. He might not disagree with the Frugonian neo-monarchists, but he wouldn't ever want to be identified as one. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:08, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Main interests"

This section increasingly looks like ascribing views from his blog in a synthesized manner. Do we have a verifiable third-party reliable source on Yarvin's claimed views? If not, possibly that bit should go - David Gerard (talk) 20:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much my read too, TBQH. Ironholds (talk) 00:55, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The current additions are indeed references, but they're all primary and blog references, except one third-party blog reference. For a controversial figure, this is way below BLP standards - David Gerard (talk) 08:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah; honestly the actual coverage is so BLP1E that it's ridiculous. Like, there are basically two kinds of reference to Yarvin that I can find via say Google News; the fact that he's been banned from cons, and very brief namechecks in articles about the "Dark Enlightenment" overall. I'm going to do some research. Ironholds (talk) 14:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Being banned from LambdaConf was directly because of the neoreactionary fame, so is part of the same thing - David Gerard (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, banned from Strange Loop, he's been allowed into LambdaConf.

The amount of primary sourcing in this article is ridiculous for a BLP. I'll wait until after the AFD, if it survives, but it's due a massive, massive cull. (The editor has only one edit to any article other than this one, and that's adding Yarvin as a notable alumnus of his high school, but does seem to be trying to do a decent Wikipedian job here.) - David Gerard (talk) 11:11, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Word. Either the article goes away or it turns up some sources to something other than Yarvin's rambles. Ironholds (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]