Talk:White pride: Difference between revisions
(wikipedia talk pages are not a forum for racists) |
(1) wikipedia talk pages are not a forum. 2) racist statements do not belong on the talk page or the article.) |
||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
:Thanks for the heads-up about this being [[WP:MTPPT|canvassed on social media]], for any content to be added [[WP:SOURCE|reliable third-party published sources are needed]]. Personal opinions are no more than [[WP:NOR|original research]], which can't be included on Wikipedia, and [[WP:WEIGHT|due weight]] has to be given to published expert views. . [[User:Dave souza|dave souza]], [[User talk:Dave souza|talk]] 21:21, 9 February 2016 (UTC) |
:Thanks for the heads-up about this being [[WP:MTPPT|canvassed on social media]], for any content to be added [[WP:SOURCE|reliable third-party published sources are needed]]. Personal opinions are no more than [[WP:NOR|original research]], which can't be included on Wikipedia, and [[WP:WEIGHT|due weight]] has to be given to published expert views. . [[User:Dave souza|dave souza]], [[User talk:Dave souza|talk]] 21:21, 9 February 2016 (UTC) |
||
{{hab}} |
{{hab}} |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2016 == |
||
| − | |||
| − | {{edit semi-protected|White pride|answered=yes}} |
||
| − | <!-- Be sure to state UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes; editors who can edit the protected page need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests WILL be declined. --> |
||
| − | <!-- Begin request --> |
||
| − | |||
| − | I believe that this page should be unprotected. The reason's being is first and foremost is that White Pride is the exact same as Black Pride and Asian Pride. How is it that those races can be prideful in their race but White's can't? Secondly, I believe that it's semi-protected so that select individuals (non whites) can edit the page history as they see fit, to make sure that if a young White child came across this page, it would make them feel guilty of being White. It's a shame that White's get treated like this and we can't even take pride in our race without being called "racist". So, if you could come up with a valid excuse of why this page doesn't say something along the lines of "Taking a positive stance of being White" and the others do, I would love to hear it. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Sincerely Yours, |
||
| − | A Proud White Man |
||
| − | <!-- End request --> |
||
| − | [[User:Ailment1|Ailment1]] ([[User talk:Ailment1|talk]]) 06:13, 10 February 2016 (UTC) |
||
| − | :[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=]] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:Clpo13|clpo13]]<sub>([[User_talk:Clpo13|talk]])</sub> 07:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 14:39, 10 February 2016
| This is not a forum for general discussion about White pride. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about White pride at the Reference desk, discuss relevant Wikipedia policy at the Village pump, or ask for help at the Help desk. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the White pride article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Article policies
|
||
| Archives: 1, 2 | |||
|
|
|||
| WikiProject Sociology | |||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
| WikiProject Discrimination | |||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
| This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived. |
Unsourced additions
Wikipedia articles are intended to summarize what independent reliable sources say about a subject. If you have material to add, it must cite reliable sources or it will be removed. - SummerPhD (talk) 22:58, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
- The original text in the definition for white pride is completely inaccurate and biased. Although there is a facet to the term or slogan that is connected with hate speech and or white nationalist skin head gangs/organizations this aspect belongs in the controversy section.my only goal is to present a proper presentation which mirrors the definitions of black pride and Asian pride. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Commonsenceforanuncommonage (talk • contribs) 08:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
- The fact is, "White Pride" is used primarily by a bunch of bigots as stated in the first sentence of the article. This is well established by many, many WP:RS. As a certifiable way-over-privileged "white guy", I wish to not be associated with this sh*t. The WP:WEIGHT is correct and the article should retain its criticism of "White Pride" Jim1138 (talk) 08:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
-
-
- Your opinions and Salon.com are not reliable sources. Have a look at the Black pride article and the vastly different tone there. It lists users of the phrase such as Black Panther Party without calling them racists (and they are). This is article is dripping with liberal, progressive, anti-white bias. Not even close to WP:NPOV Matty1487 (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
-
Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2016
| WP:NOTFORUM EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 02:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC) | ||
|---|---|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
I have a complain about the current status about the pride branches. Gay pride: stand against homofobia and being proud in being homosexual. Black pride: About pride in being black. Asian pride: about pride in being asian. And the last one White pride: used by racist and neo nazis used to show their racism seriously wiki? how can it be racist to be proud in being white but not in being black? i want to see a change in this or else i am willing to go far with this. 90.231.230.107 (talk) 20:04, 9 February 2016 (UTC) This is making it's rounds on social media, and though Social Media shouldn't be the authority on how wiki articles should be structured, I can certainly see the benefit in changing the wordings here, as previously stated, it is a heavily biased introduction. --152.228.136.72 (talk) 20:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
|