 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.49.100.7 ( talk) 17:05, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
This is supposed to be neutral encyclopedia, not a place to spout your personal political opinions. Let's not forget that illegal immigration itself is a crime, and if these perps were be kept out of the country like they should have, these other crimes wouldn't have happened in the first place. Bjoh249 ( talk) 16:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Is this niche phrase really worthy of its own article? Rafe Goldberg ( talk) 00:45, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
|
| This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.49.100.7 ( talk) 17:05, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
This is supposed to be neutral encyclopedia, not a place to spout your personal political opinions. Let's not forget that illegal immigration itself is a crime, and if these perps were be kept out of the country like they should have, these other crimes wouldn't have happened in the first place. Bjoh249 ( talk) 16:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Is this niche phrase really worthy of its own article? Rafe Goldberg ( talk) 00:45, 2 November 2020 (UTC)