Talk:Stefan Molyneux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Find sources: "Stefan Molyneux" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference
Find sources: "Freedomain Radio" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · HighBeam · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · The Wikipedia Library · NYT · WP reference

Molyneux's Background[edit]

This article seems to be protected for disingenuous reasons as any entries about Molyneux's background are instantly deleted where the user who reverts will reject such entries for not being "Secondary Sources" yet will keep up entries about Molyneux's theories which are Primary Sources which are in themselves subject to a greater deal of nuance and interpretation by virtue of the fact discussions of politics are more abstract yet entries inserted of Molyneux himself detailing his ethnic/religious/cultural origin are very quickly deleted. So which is it? An article Molyneux writes about political theory can be cited and used to write up an entire section in 'Stateless Society' but his own religious background and upbringing as cited by himself on numerous occasions can not? When the former is mor subject to change and the latter is grounded in reality and cannot?

Also, this specific user in question, SPECIFICO, wrote this in the article earlier this month:

"Cheap at half the price! Instantly delivered to your Kindle. Philosophy. SPECIFICO talk 00:00, 2 September 2017 (UTC)"

What exactly was meant by this? And is this the calibre of a "Veteran Editor"? I now see it fit to report this user under the suspicion that their edits are motivated by some cause other than neutrality. Rìgh (talk) 19:41, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Actually, you have it backwards. One's beliefs are whatever one says they are, hence we use self-described beliefs in limited circumstances. Facts about one's family, however, are nevertheless facts. Like any other facts, they may be misremembered, falsified, obscured, or fabricated. SPECIFICO talk 19:58, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
"Actually, you have it backwards. One's beliefs are whatever one says they are" This is highly dubious which is why when writing an article, a user should put "X claims Y" or "X states that they believe Y". Why is Molyneux's racial background (which has been confirmed multiple times by himself) removed but the fact he was born in Ireland is not questioned? Or the date at which he moved? Those two 'facts' are found in an article (Reference #9 as of now) that is stuck behind a paywall and therefore cannot be confirmed and whose reporters like the other articles are receiving that very information from Molyneux himself. I understand the position from which you come but I find this highly suspicious. No secondary sources can be found by myself at this moment pertaining to the information I entered into the article, so what happens? His background is essentially left bare and gives a false impression that Molyneux is ethnically Irish or grew up religiously Christian. Rìgh (talk) 20:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
This article would be better if all the self-sourced, primary-sourced, video, bloggo, youtube, self-published, and promotional content were removed. You'll get no objection from me if you delete it all. Just don't put the Jewish family stuff back in unless you have an independent, reliable source that verifies it. (There is none). SPECIFICO talk 20:38, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I doubt there will be a Secondary Source in the near future. Would you accept an insert which says, "Molyneux has stated in previous podcasts that his mother was Jewish" or "Molyneux claims that his mother fled Dresden in fear of allied bombing" or something in that vain? That will be true in the sense that it has indeed been claimed by him but not true in the definitive sense of having been confirmed by a Secondary Source. Rìgh (talk) 22:08, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
No. He could be saying his mother was an antelope and his father was an ostrich for whatever reason. It's simply unverified and not sourced. There are all kind of reasons he might be saying this. That's why we don't use it. SPECIFICO talk 23:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
"There are all kind of reasons he might be saying this. That's why we don't use it." What the hell does that mean? That sounds like you only want to remove the statements made by him because the editors have some ideological bias in connecting him with Jewishness or Judaism. Very strange indeed. Rìgh (talk) 00:27, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
You've made your point. It's rejected. Save your breath. SPECIFICO talk 00:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
To quote the person in question, Not an argument. Rìgh (talk) 00:35, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Molyneux himself also really likes to insinuate things without saying them. Insinuating that the only motive for rejecting this utterly unreliable trivia is antisemitism isn't an argument either. Instead, it's casting aspersions while also missing the point. If there were some valid reason, supported by reliable sources, to include this, it could be included. So for, nothing, so it shouldn't be added. Being a prolific self-publisher doesn't justify expanding this article. WP:DUE weight means this article's length should be proportional to reliable sources. He is not reliable, and this article shouldn't be padded out with kibbles and bits for undefined reasons. Grayfell (talk) 04:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
I didn't insinuate anti-Semitism or pro-Semitism and to talk about insinuation is not something a Wikipedia editor should do. It is no matter, this article will not be edited by myself to include Molyneux's ethnic origin until a sufficient Secondary source is published. Until then, sayonara. Rìgh (talk) 08:10, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

SPECIFICO seems to hold a strange belief that I am a Stefan Molyneux supporter and wish to clear his name from White Nationalism or Racism. That is NOT the case. I care about one thing and one thing alone, proving the TRUTH for Wikipedia. Stefan Molyneux has stated in MULTIPLE podcasts (they have been referenced) from the past and lectures[1] that he was born to a Jewish mother. The user in question has stated that if I produced a secondary source that confirms this alongside the primary ones, the information would be allowed to stay. So I did this in producing an article from Salon. The user in question then REMOVES this and claims that Molyneux never states he is Jewish in the podcasts even though this is DEMONSTRABLY FALSE from actually checking the references and I will provide the EXACT minute and second he states it.

Truth above all. I believe this user has a political agenda, of what kind, I do not know. All I know is that I MYSELF have no political agenda but the facts and the facts are this; Stefan Molyneux was born to a Jewish mother and if he covers this up nowadays for whatever reason then I shall prove this also. Rìgh (talk) 19:09, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Don't personalize your talk page comments. I'll leave notice on your talkpage. SPECIFICO talk 19:17, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Check out WP:NOTTRUTH too. What secondary sources say is most significant/important here. Fyddlestix (talk) 19:29, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2017[edit]

To include the statement that Stefan Molyneux's Freedman Radio is a cult, is preposterous. Dark Net is not recognized as a body with the authority to pronounce such things, nor was there evidence given, nor was there reason for including it on Stefan's page EXCEPT to slander him and promote a Leftist ideology. (talk) 23:08, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Many sources, of which Dark Net is only one, describe Freedomain as being cult-like, and Wikipedia includes several of these sources. These sources are reliable according to Wikipedia's standards. Grayfell (talk) 00:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 December 2017[edit]

Stefan Molyneux is a libertarian, not part of the alt-right. Also, he was not a big supporter of President Trump's campaign. He has been critical to Trumps actions on numerous occasions, while supporting a few of his actions that are more libertarian in nature, rather than conservative. He is constantly called alt-right, but in reality he is a libertarian. Libertarians have some views that are similar to conservatives on certain issues, but they also have views that are similar to liberal views as well. Eirik929 (talk) 08:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

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. Terra (talk) 09:16, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Wikipedia uses reliable sources, with a preference for independent sources. Wikipedia editors like you and me are not reliable, and Molneux is not independent. If you know of a reliable source which discusses his Libertarianism, or how not-alt-right he is, bring it forth for discussion. This is not a forum for general discussion or original research, so your individual assessment of Molyneux, or of the views of libertarians, are not helpful in improving this article. Grayfell (talk) 09:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
User:Eirik929—you may be right but your suggestions should take the form of wording supported by sources. In other words, please be more specific. Is there an edit that you would suggest? Where in the article would the change be made? What source would support your suggested edit? Also, consider creating a WP:USERPAGE and a user Talk page. Also, feel free to avail yourself of the Teahouse for various and sundry questions that you might have. Happy editing! Bus stop (talk) 09:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

jewish redux again[edit]

SPECIFICO I see your revert on the recent addition of Molyneux Jewish ancestry. Salon seems to back his judaism. Salon is generally considered an RS. The anonymous blogger is not alone in being a Jewish person making common cause with racist anti-Semites, however. Many leading figures associated with the alt-right are also Jewish themselves including Ramsey, Cernovich, Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos, libertarian vlogger Stefan Molyneux and publishing entrepreneur Ezra Levant.. Additionally, I am surprised by your statement regarding extraordinary claims. While that is indeed wikipeia policy, I think this is not an extraordinary claim. Many people are jewish or have jewish ancestry. We generally take their own word for it in biographical articles. In this case we have both Molyneux's own words, and secondary sources stating it in their own voice. To be sure, I don't think this is a super important bit of information, but I think your reasoning for removing it are not correct.ResultingConstant (talk) 18:51, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Salon is a dicey source to begin with. I would not in general use it for anything very complicated or needing investigation, fact-checking, or research. The author of this particular piece is described on their website as everything but a journalist. And what are you claiming? That he has "Jewish" DNA or blood lines like a horse or a dog? SPECIFICO talk 19:21, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Im saying nothing other than he has Jewish ancestry. YOUR statements comparing things to a horse or dog are very out of line and I suggest you redact them. There are a great many biographies that mention or discuss the ancestry and ethnicity of their subjects or their families. There are a great many biographies that mention or discuss the specific jewish ancestry and ethnicity of their subject or family. Its a common point of interest. That some people wish to use that fact arguing for or against certain points is irrelevant (and I certainly agree with you that such arguments are not encyclopedic and should not be included). But because a fact could be illegitimately used in an argument does not suddenly make that fact untrue or encyclopedic. ResultingConstant (talk) 19:29, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
ResultingConstant I don't know whether you've listened to how Molyneux uses the "Jewish Clan" bit in his Youtube video or whether you've read the previous talk page discussions of this, but they both shed additional light on the matter. SPECIFICO talk 20:03, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
SPECIFICO I have read the other discussions, and they mostly amount to you doing original research. That the video goes on to make other claims that actually are extraordinary, or encyclopedic is irrelevant. We are not discussing including those elements. Judaism is a religion. You are correct that Molyneux is not religiously Jewish. But Judaism is also an ethnicity. And Molyneux is of partial Jewish ethnicity. You don't get to ignore part of the definition because it suits your pov. ResultingConstant (talk) 15:43, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Salon is ok, although I'd rather see a better (or several) sources for this. Ive trimmed the mention of his religion to what the salon ref actually supports though. The broader discussion, sourced to his own podcast, was quite undue emphasis imo. Fyddlestix (talk) 19:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Look at the writer. This is not RS for an extraordinary claim. If it is true, the only mention of it would not be a weak writer in a weak publication. (from WP sourcing POV) More important, "Jewish" is a religious belief and Molyneux has never to my knowledge claimed to be of that religion. He talks at length about his Christian upbringing and his atheism. I hope these editors can find proper sources, but meanwhile we can't rush to put likely nonsense or worse into this BLP. SPECIFICO talk 19:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
He talks at length about his Christian upbringing and his atheism Hm that does make describing him as "Jewish" problematic. Let me see if I can find any more/better sources on this - I agree it should stay out pending this discussion. Fyddlestix (talk) 19:36, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
SPECIFICO—why do you perceive the claim of Molyneux being Jewish to be an "extraordinary claim"? Bus stop (talk) 21:02, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
I believe you and I have been around the circle on that one, so I won't repeat it. Do you think WP should tag people "Jewish" as a racial or genetic attribute rather than as a matter of religious belief and observance? You're aware, I presume, of Molyneux' extensive discussion of his upbringing as a church coirboy and his subsequent abandonment of religion. SPECIFICO talk 22:50, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
SPECIFICO—do you have any sources suggesting that Molyneux might not be Jewish? Bus stop (talk) 23:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
That's not how it works. The WP:ONUS and WP:BURDEN is on proving it should be included. This content has a WP:REDFLAG all over it. An Irish Christian who is actually Jewish, even though his own videos discuss his rejection of religion. And his Jewish family lived happily in Dresden until near the end days of WW2. This is an extraordinary claim, and the default is to exclude. Valid content will have many indisputably Reliable Sources to verify and establish the noteworthiness of such content. SPECIFICO talk 00:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if Molyneux meets your preconceptions of what a Jew is. It is the sources that matter. I think you are conceding that you have no sources suggesting that Molyneux might not be Jewish. You are reverting other editors (here and here). In my opinion it is preposterous of you to ask if he has "DNA or blood lines like a horse or a dog." Not only is that original research but it is reflective of an incomplete understanding of how a person comes to be identified as a Jew. Bus stop (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
You've made several false statements in that post, but the crux is that the burden is on the editor who advocates to include, and this bit is not well-enough sourced for the claim it makes. Yes, there are abundant sources that describe Molyneux background and religious upbringing as being not Jewish. Please review the links I provided above. SPECIFICO talk 00:54, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Let's discuss this. What source supports that Molyneux may not be Jewish? Please post that source right here so that we can discuss it. I thank you in advance. Bus stop (talk) 01:14, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I've responded several times, sorry. Please review this and the previous thread from when we initially discussed this. I don't have a source that says he's not an elephant, but I wouldn't suggest we put that in the article. And he does appear to walk on two legs. SPECIFICO talk 02:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
OK, you concede that you have no sources suggesting that he is not Jewish, therefore we should go with the sources suggesting that he is Jewish. Bus stop (talk) 02:09, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I've told you why that's incorrect. I strongly advise against it. SPECIFICO talk 02:43, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Why do you "strongly advise against it"? You don't seem to understand that this is a Talk page. You have only demonstrated one thing: that you don't want to discuss this issue. That is a funny position to take as you have reverted material related to this issue twice ([1][2]). Bus stop (talk) 03:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Jewish isn't an extraordinary claim. Salon reports it, Molyneu confirms it, no sources dispute it. Good enough for us. D.Creish (talk) 03:45, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── After looking into this some, I'm uncomfortable with it: Molyneux has gone on record himself as saying his mother was Jewish. But he's also said that he was raised a Christian. People on the far right appear to have run with the "Jewish mother = Jewish" assumption and characterize him that way regularly (though in places, and via sources, that aren't RS for our purposes) but after looking quite carefully, I don't see where Molyneux has ever said he practices Judaism. I do see videos and blog posts online where he talks about having been raised Christian, though, and where he is quite critical of organized religion in general. So the question really is: what is meant by "Jewish" - it can be used to refer to someone of Jewish ethnicity (which, given Molyneux's own statements about himself, seems like what the Salon writer meant), but in general use it implies that he's a practicing Jew, which (again, based on his own statements) is pretty unlikely. Problem is: outside of the Salon piece I can't find a single RS that talks about his religion or mentions his religious upbringing. So we have the Salon piece on one hand and his own statements (which contradict a simple statement of "Molyneux is Jewish") on the other. IMO, we should either state what Molyneux himself has said (that his mother was Jewish, but he was raised as a Christian), and source it to his own statements, or remain silent on his religion altogether. Otherwise we risk misleading the reader by saying "he's Jewish" when he's not a practicing Jew, and is simply of Jewish ancestry on one side. Given that it's the only RS I can find saying he's Jewish (outside of Stormfront-type fringe stuff) and that his own statements appear to contradict that, hanging an ambiguous statement like "Molyneux is Jewish" on the Salon piece is undue weight on that one source. Fyddlestix (talk) 05:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Well said. I see no great harm in leaving it out, but this is the rare case where a Stefan Molyneux video could be used as a source. I do not think Salon is universally unreliable, but I avoid it whenever possible. "Molyneux was raised Christian. His mother was Jewish" or similar is good enough. If this becomes controversial as with Yiannopoulos, we can judge based on those hypothetical sources. For now, one/two sentences is plenty. Grayfell (talk) 08:29, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Have a listen to the video, if you fancy. What he says is "my mother came from a pretty Jewish clan..." -- nothing about her religion -- and then goes on to say how these folks lived openly in Dresden throughout the Nazi regime until the firebombing near the end of WW2. Extraordinary. SPECIFICO talk 15:05, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Ludicrously, you argue that Molyneux cannot possibly be Jewish because, in your words, "these folks lived openly in Dresden throughout the Nazi regime until the firebombing near the end of WW2". That is tantamount to original research. You have latched onto an only tangentially-related detail to reach a conclusion which you concede is not supported by sources. I have asked you to present a source suggesting that Molyneux might not be Jewish. You have not done that yet. Bus stop (talk) 15:19, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I think you are bright and thoughtful enough to do better than that. Please don't mock. Don't personalize content discussions. WP policies and guidelines tell us how to evaluate sources relative to the specific article content they would support. If there were a secondary article on the topic of Molyneux' religious beliefs that reflected a journalist's credible investigation into the matter, that might be convincing. When it's a throwaway line, or one more name added to a long list of provocateurs to advance a catchy current-events piece in a marginal publication like Salon by a little-known author, then no siree, that is not a good source. SPECIFICO talk 15:46, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
This is a biography of a person. You are referring to "the topic of Molyneux' religious beliefs" but this discussion, strictly speaking, is not about "Molyneux' religious beliefs". As concerns personalizing content discussions I have to return to your mocking inquiry as to whether Molyneux has "DNA or blood lines like a horse or a dog". This discussion should concern sources, primarily, not delving into your opinions of only tangentially-related subjects. Please note that we are not concerned with his "religious beliefs". We have no information on his religious beliefs. Approximately half of all Jews are nonobservant. We have plenty of biographies of nonobservant Jews in which it is noted in the article that they are Jewish. Bus stop (talk) 16:10, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
In this edit summary you say that "Jewish is not a bloodline". I am asking you to please keep off-topic comments out of edit summaries. Bus stop (talk) 16:15, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
We have plenty of biographies of nonobservant Jews in which it is noted in the article that they are Jewish - sure. How many of those people have publicly said that they were raised as Christians, and made a living (in part) off criticizing organized religion in general? How many of those people have never self-identified as "Jewish"? Molyneux, as best as I can tell, never has. He's said that his mothers family was Jewish, but that's not the same thing as saying "I'm Jewish" - there is no One drop rule of Judaism, and given that there's compelling reason to doubt that Molyneux considers himself Jewish or has ever practiced Judaism (ie, his own statements) one article in Salon that characterizes him as a "Jewish" in passing, which is the only RS anyone has found that says that, is simply not enough to apply the label. Sorry, but it's just not. If you're that determined to include this, and if you think it's really that clear cut, do some research and find some RS that support it and we can talk. Fyddlestix (talk) 18:10, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Moreover those non-religious "Jewish" BLP mentions are for individuals who self-identify as Jewish. In fact we go out of our way to note stuff like "O'Shaughnessy was born to a Jewish family in Ireland and sang in the church choir as a youth..." in cases like Molyneux'. This Molyneux/Jewish bit is a racial statement of a sort that WP takes pains not to make and that is irrelevant to anything at all noteworthy about him or his work. SPECIFICO talk 18:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
We know that he is Jewish because he says that his mother was born in Berlin in 1937 to a "pretty Jewish clan"[3] and the Salon article says that he is Jewish[4]. As to whether this is relevant in this article, the Salon article explains this as an example of a Jewish person making "common cause" with antisemitic people. Why would we omit sourced information from a biography? Bus stop (talk) 20:44, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
At least 3 different editors have already explained why, I see no point in repeating the same arguments ad nauseam. Feel free to start an rfc or bring this up at BLPN if you're unwilling to let it go - but personally I'm confident a broader group of editors will draw the same conclusion I did. Fyddlestix (talk) 20:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Your reasoning is based on faulty understanding. You say "I don't see where Molyneux has ever said he practices Judaism." I don't think you know how irrelevant that is. And that is part of your reasoning. It seems to me that you think you are wiser than sources. You are saying a variety of irrelevant things. You say "we risk misleading the reader by saying 'he's Jewish' when he's not a practicing Jew". What? In your supreme wisdom you reason that by giving the reader information we are misleading them? Yikes. Approximately 50% of Jews are nonobservant. It doesn't matter if you don't know or accept this. What matters is that sources know that. We follow sources. Does a source support that Molyneux is Jewish? Yes. The Salon article supports that Molyneux is Jewish. Bus stop (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────A "pretty Jewish clan" is not sufficient to say his mother was Jewish, much less to say that he was Jewish. Why is it only "pretty Jewish"? Using clan instead of family also adds ambiguity. Combine this with the Dresden thing, and I think this surpasses the OR threshold into a genuinely unusual claim being highlighted from extremely thin sources. As with so many of his videos, he almost says something meaningful, but never quite gets there. Lacking either quality source, or a definitive primary source, I say leave it out completely. This isn't the place to discuss issues of Jewish identity beyond what sources say about it. They do not say he's of Jewish ethnicity, nor do they say his mother was religiously Jewish, nor culturally Jewish. We would have to clarify what, exactly, "Jewish" means in the article, and currently proposed sourced do not justify that level of detail. Grayfell (talk) 22:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

And of course it gets even worse the more one considers this racialist tagging. Let's say a Chinese Taoist woman moves to Poland and converts to Judaism. There she lives and has a child, a daughter in fact, and names her Lulu. Lulu grows up, travels to India, and marries an Indian bloke, a Hindu priest. The couple have a son, Vipal who is immersed in the Hindu life and observance from an early age. Then, one day Vipal goes to an alt-right rally and is spotted there. Do we say Vipal the Jew is at an alt-right rally? Do we say Vipal whose Chinese mother is Jewish went to the rally? Do we say Vipal, whose mother, who was formerly Taoist, Jewish, and Hindu..." ANS: We say none of this cause it's all racialist nonsense. SPECIFICO talk 01:51, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
On what does the Salon source base its information that Molyneux is Jewish? Please tell me, if you know. Bus stop (talk) 03:20, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
You tell me. I think it's error, hearsay, or nonsense. No source cited in Salon. SPECIFICO talk 03:26, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
I am not going to tell you. I admit when I don't know something. I accept the limitations of my knowledge. You on the other hand go on creative writing binges. I can tell you I am not in the least bit interested in your full blown creative writing sprees. Bus stop (talk) 04:05, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── SPECIFICO clearly has an agenda. I have provided TWO podcasts where he goes into depth about his Jewish ancestry of BOTH his mother and his grandmother AND their experience in Dresden. I have also provided YouTube evidence of him claiming his mother was born to a "Jewish clan" AND I have provided a Salon (Reliable Source) article as a secondary source to BACK THIS UP after being asked to in a previous attempt at inputting this information. SPECIFICO is using Original Research and disingenuous arguments to remove this information from the Wikipedia. There are COUNTLESS Wikipedia biographical articles where the sources are PRIMARY and from the OWN MOUTHS of the person in question. These are not put into question but TWO PODCASTS of GREAT LENGTH, a YouTube Lecture and SECONDARY SOURCES are "insufficient". I am entirely convinced that the reasons for these reverts are NOT in good faith and I would like to know why this is the case. And before SPECIFICO claims I am "personalising" the Talk section, no, it is YOU personalising this article by inserting Original Research. Rìgh (talk) 03:51, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Please give a link to where Molyneux states that he "is Jewish" Without this, the Youtube bits do not verify "Molyneux is Jewish". That's fundamental Wikipedia policy. WP:V. SPECIFICO talk 03:59, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
PODCAST EVIDENCE #1[1] @ 22:35 "Some of my mother's tales, she was born in 1937 in Germany, not the best place to be especially when you come from a Jewish heritage. Not the best place to be at all. And all sympathies to my mother as a child. It still doesn’t excuse the evil woman she became, but I can certainly understand that her life was just hellish for her as a child."

PODCAST EVIDENCE #2[2] @ 9:44 "On my mother’s side there is a lot more, I guess Jewish influence a Jewish history, as far as i understand it my grandmother was Jewish. Which I’ve also been told makes me Jewish. So I could give a flying fig about that, since the idea of taking on somebody else’s sort of pre-scripted identity would just feel unbelievably claustrophobic and nightmarish. Of course Spinoza and Jewish Philosophers who have great ideas fantastic lets jaw about it all night, but the idea of taking some preformed cultural identity I view that with complete horror. So although people have said “”oh that makes you Jewish”” I really can’t imagine that could have any interest or relevance to me."

PODCAST EVIDENCE #3[3] @ 6:39 "For my mother to see most of her family wiped out, because ofcourse she came from … uh her mother was Jewish. And for my mother’s own childhood to be the carnage and brutal series of orphanage rapes that I am absolute positive that it was."

PODCAST EVIDENCE #4[4] @ 32:01 "She was born as I mentioned before 1937 in Berlin, Jewish heritage, not a good place to be. Spend her war years been shunted around, hidden, send to orphanages. You can imagine what was going on in those orphanages, particularly in wartime, was just the worst kind of predation that you can Imagine."

PODCAST EVIDENCE #5[5] @ 5:13 "My mother was just mad .. like she is just mad and vain and weird. And she also, to me at least, had the additional, not inconsiderable, excuse of having grown up in Nazi Germany as the son of Jewish parents. And she was born in Berlin in 1937 not a good place to have the hallmark childhood so she was shipped to from sort of.. they were in hiding for periods of the war and then she was shipped from orphanages to orphanage during the war and ofcourse complete social breakdown and malignant evil throughout the land. I can only imagine what happened to her in the wee hours with the caregivers who were around. So, she was crazy mad and evil but at least had some pretty sparky starting point to start from so It is something that .. I don’t forgive but I can sort of understand it a little but more."

PODCAST EVIDENCE #6[6] @ 1:32:27 "I understand that my mother was, you know, had her entire world bombed into oblivion in the 2nd World War. And that she lived in a world that was so terrifying that I don’t think I can even conceive it, right? Her mother was blown apart in the fire bombings of Dresden in 1944. On a bombing raid that one of my uncles on my father’s side was actually piloting in. And she lived in a world that was just blowing up literally blowing up in a way that I can’t even fathom. And what happened to her during the course of that, you know, a girl racing across Germany living in a series of orphanages pulling her own Anne Frank thing from time to time because she came from Jewish parents."

There you go. Now let NO ONE deny that I am providing evidence. Happy now? Or are you going to delete my edits again? Rìgh (talk) 04:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Very helpful, thanks. Those statements present Molyneux saying that his grandparents on one side were Jewish and also saying that he himself is not Jewish. Again, not verifying the claim that Molyneux is Jewish in WP's voice. SPECIFICO talk 04:19, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Rìgh—it is not necessary to say that someone is lying, as that is a personal attack. Bus stop (talk) 04:28, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
HE IS LYING. I have provided SIX podcasts which ALL back each other up in their claims, a YouTube lecture and a Secondary Reliable Source. Rìgh (talk) 04:30, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Rìgh—you have to practice politics. Bus stop (talk) 04:32, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
FUCK politics, Wikipedia has been DECLINING FOR NEARLY A DECADE because of this Notability obsession and ADMINISTRATIVE BUREAUCRACY. I will NOT SUCK UP TO ADMINS to fulfil the truth. Rìgh (talk) 04:35, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
SPECIFICO—Molyneux does not say that he is not Jewish. And the Salon source supports that Molyneux is Jewish. Bus stop (talk) 04:24, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
I disagree. He specifically rejects the idea of a Jewish identity as "claustrophobic and nightmarish", and only says that his mother has Jewish heritage. It would not be correct to say "he is Jewish", because a simplistic statement like that doesn't convey any nuance or context all all. It's obvious from the sources that it isn't that simple. Grayfell (talk) 04:32, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
He rejects Jewish identity because he is not religiously Jewish. He says people call him Jewish because his mother was Jewish which is ETHNIC. Jews are an ETHNO-RELIGIOUS people and this is confirmed in the Wikipedia page on Jews IN THE FIRST LINE. Rìgh (talk) 04:35, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


Rìgh—I agree with you that the Salon source supports that Molyneux is Jewish and I thank you for gathering those podcast quotes from Molyneux. But could you please stop typing in caps? Bus stop (talk) 04:48, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia doesn't treat ethnicity or self-identification quite this simplistically. He is 1/4th Jewish, but the sources never really say "ethnically" Jewish. As I said, this really isn't the place to debate the Jewish identity question. Whatever the reason it's vitally important to some people to have this documented here is irrelevant. He clearly doesn't identify himself as Jewish in simple terms, and he doesn't even unambiguously identify his mother as Jewish, so... why does this matter? Why does this matter so much that it MUST be included in this encyclopedia article? Grayfell (talk) 04:44, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Grayfell—you say "this really isn't the place to debate the Jewish identity" but you are the only one debating that. Molyneux is Jewish according to Salon[5]. Bus stop (talk) 04:56, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
What is with the diff? Do you think I'm going to delete my comments or something? C'mon, this isn't 4chan.
WP:CONTEXTMATTERS, So let's talk about the Salon source. It's a single sentence, near the end of the article, in passing, about something dramatically more complicated and intensely controversial. Mainly, it's about the Nazi salute as used by American white supremacists at an event that Molyneux wasn't involved with or anywhere near (as far as I know). This sentence is the only mention in the article of Molyneux. The Salon article cites, as its source, a 26 second youtube clip titled "Stefan Molyneux Jewish confession" stripped of all context uploaded by an anonymous account named "911TruthNOW". This account is mostly general conspiracy theory garbage, but includes a healthy does of anti-Semitic "Jews run the world" conspiracy theory garbage as well. So why does this passing mention in a highly controversial article indicate that "he is Jewish" in simple terms belongs in the article, when Molyneux himself obviously believes its more complicated than this? Should we ignore the context of this source, and the complexity of these other podcast sources, and just go with the simplest tabloid summary of a notoriously complicated issue? No, for many reasons this would be too simplistic, non-neutral, and inappropriate. Grayfell (talk) 05:22, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Yawn, I knew the YouTube uploader would be brought up as an argument which it is not. You can watch the full lecture on YouTube for free from other videos. I selected that video because it contained the evidence. Bad argument, try again. A veteran editor too, how embarrassing!Rìgh (talk) 05:25, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
While Molyneux loves to use "not an argument" as though he were an authority on arguments, you do not have that luxury. So... what are you talking about, exactly? Why would we present something as complicated as this in such utterly simplistic terms, based on such a flimsy passing mention? You're not really answering the concern here, as much fun as you appear to be having. Grayfell (talk) 05:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Yawn, I knew this veteran editor would insinuate I'm some kind of Molyneux supporter. How do these veteran editors continue to plague Wikipedia with their claims of neutrality yet clear bias really surprises me. This website is truly dead.Rìgh (talk) 05:38, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Grayfell—what if we said something like: "Molyneux has some Jewish heritage although he doesn't strongly identify with it." I am thinking that is a fair distillation of: "On my mother’s side there is a lot more, I guess Jewish influence a Jewish history, as far as I understand it my grandmother was Jewish. Which I’ve also been told makes me Jewish. So I could give a flying fig about that, since the idea of taking on somebody else’s sort of pre-scripted identity would just feel unbelievably claustrophobic and nightmarish. Of course Spinoza and Jewish Philosophers who have great ideas fantastic lets jaw about it all night, but the idea of taking some preformed cultural identity I view that with complete horror. So although people have said 'oh that makes you Jewish' I really can’t imagine that could have any interest or relevance to me." (I thank Rìgh for that wording.) Another possibility could be something along the lines of: "In some of his broadcasts Molyneux contemplates that he may have Jewish heritage." It is not just the above quote from Molyneux that leads me to make these suggestions, but the many times Molyneux talks about Jews in his family of origin. Bus stop (talk) 14:38, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


BS, That fails WP:V - we can't use something kinda sorta to make an extraordinary claim. "Heritage" is a weasel tilt. The only thing that we get from those videos is that Molyneux states that his mother's mother was Jewish, then there's lots about how his mother was not Jewish, he was raised Christian, and he hates mom and religion and so forth. Verification is pretty simple and straightforward. Not something we assemble from shreds of this and that more or less plausibly related to something-or-other quite broad and different. SPECIFICO talk 14:48, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
This is getting ridiculous. Righ's quotes underline just how clearly Molyneux has said that he does not consider himself Jewish, and never has. There is nothing more to discuss here. We can't label people as having an identity (whether ethnic or religious) that they actively reject, full stop. The fact that we're talking about Jewish identity (and the fact that that outside of that one, outlying Salon piece this seems to be something that you primarily find discussed by neo-nazis and conspiracy theorists online) is particularly unseemly. Enough. Fyddlestix (talk) 15:10, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
I don't know if Fyddlestix or SPECIFICO have noticed but I am not suggesting that our article make an assertion that Stefan Molyneux is Jewish. But in keeping with the numerous instances in which he references a possibly Jewish family of origin I think we serve the needs of the article in including a sentence to that effect, such as "In some of his broadcasts Molyneux contemplates that he may have Jewish heritage." I believe this is a fair distillation of the numerous times he invokes references to a possibly Jewish family of origin. That suggested sentence does not say that Molyneux is Jewish. Of course other possible language for such a sentence should be considered. But we are trying to write a biography. Note what our article Biography says: "It involves more than just the basic facts like education, work, relationships, and death; it portrays a person's experience of these life events." We should want to capture in this biography the interest expressed by Molyneux in a possibly Jewish family of origin. Bus stop (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
I don't think Molyneux's statements support that. I can see maybe saying that "Molyneux has said that his mother came from a Jewish family, but rejects the idea that he is himself Jewish" - which is much more in line with his statements - but even that seems like undue emphasis to me. He's quite clear that he rejects the suggestion - so why does it need to be mentioned at all? A single RS mentioning it (and getting it wrong) is not enough to justify including it. Fyddlestix (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
I am suggesting that we allude in our biography, in one brief sentence, to his apparent concerns with a possibly Jewish family of origin, situated in war-torn Europe. Molyneux is particularly concerned with the Holocaust as the setting in which his possibly Jewish family of origin is situated. He talks at length about the horrors of such a setting for his mother and he does so in the context of her possibly being Jewish. Bus stop (talk) 16:56, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
This is an encylopedia. We don't load up the BLP of a minor self-publishing pop-culture figures with editor-curated this and that from the blogger's self-published vault of bluster, innuendo and rumination. WP policy, honed from millions of hours of community experience, tells us that when information is truly noteworthy it will be easy to cite multiple Reliable Source references to verify it. That's simply not the case here.
We reflect the weight of mainstream secondary coverage. We don't do contortions.  SPECIFICO talk  19:40, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


Here we have an editor, Volunteer Marek, removing material relating to Molyneux being Jewish, with the edit summary "why would this be relevant?" The provided source tells us why this is relevant. The source says that "The anonymous blogger is not alone in being a Jewish person making common cause with racist anti-Semites, however. Many leading figures associated with the alt-right are also Jewish themselves including Ramsey, Cernovich, Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos, libertarian vlogger Stefan Molyneux and publishing entrepreneur Ezra Levant."[6] The relevance is that Jewish people—Molyneux, among others—are "making common cause with racist anti-Semites". Bus stop (talk) 08:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

First, Salon is a dubious source. Second, the "making common cause with racist anti-Semites" is not what the relevant text you want in the article says. Volunteer Marek  16:19, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I haven't expressed any text that I want in the article. I am responding to your edit summary. The source is not just making an idle comment. The source is making a point. I think it would be fair to say that the source finds it remarkable that the named Jewish people make "common cause" with "anti-Semites". Your edit summary asks "why would this be relevant". That is a fair question. An examination of the source reveals a reason this might be relevant. Bus stop (talk) 16:32, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
By complaining about my removal, you did indeed express a preference for a particular piece of text. Volunteer Marek  22:00, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
I am not sure that is true. It may or may not be correct. I feel that we should include mention that he may be Jewish in the article. I would even go so far as to say that I don't think it would be entirely improper to say he is Jewish. But at this point I am only prepared to say that some mention of this should be made. I am open to considerations in which a multiple-assertion sentence is created. Many other editors are rightfully concerned that his upbringing was Christian, that he was a choirboy, that he is an atheist, that he articulates a rejection of organized religion—I think these are all loosely-related considerations in describing him. (Those assertions would require sources, as they are not in the article now.) I only reacted to your edit summary. And of course that your edit removed all traces from the article that he may be Jewish. I don't think my "complaint" was an endorsement of any specific wording. Bus stop (talk) 22:20, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
We can stipulate, can we not, that Molyneux is not observing or practicing the Jewish religion. We also know that he discusses his Christian family environment with his mom and his choirboy youth. We also know that he subsequently turned against religion and discusses atheism at great length in his self-published videos. There's longstanding agreement on Wikipedia that we do not throw "Jewish" into articles as a racial or genetic tag without RS verification as to the subject's Jewish observance. But from his own extensive videoblogging, we are told that there was no such observance in Molyneux' family during his lifetime. Furthermore the issue of his religion is not central to his notability or to the verified content of this BLP. And SM's religion was not the main point of the Salon piece. Valid encylopedic content will have more than a single marginal throw-away mention to verify it. Find us an RS article that is about Molyneux' religion. Then you'll have something to hang your hat on.🕵️ SPECIFICO talk 17:09, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
Interestingly you are obsessing over that which does not matter. Why are you seemingly so concerned over whether he is observant or not? That is irrelevant. Bus stop (talk) 20:44, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
that which does not matter - Do you mean to say that relevance to the subject of the article "does not matter"? I don't think so, but if not then could you explain why this dubious snippet of a throw-in line -- no more than a label -- from the "Salon" website is relevant to the life of Stefan Molyneux? What is the relevance of the specific statement in that Salon page to the topic of this WP article? SPECIFICO talk 15:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC) I'm striking this. It's pointless since we have no verified statements of fact from which to move on to the WEIGHT|due weight and relevance evaluation. There's really nothing more to say without verified material on the table. SPECIFICO talk 15:30, 16 December 2017 (UTC)