![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
![]() | This
edit request to
Gavin McInnes has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Citation needed for the claim that Gavin McInnes is a "far-right" political commentator. A NY Times opinion article isn't a good citation. 2601:408:700:6170:595F:6F31:FA56:4CF5 ( talk) 02:07, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Biased political organizations shouldn't be considered sources since they have no incentive to be accurate. By using one of them, you are going against the Neutral Point of View of wikipedia.
There needs to be another source for his controversies than Media Matters. Rush Limbaugh wouldn't be considered an acceptable source for a page about Obama for the same reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.7.197.70 ( talk) 11:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Has anyone seen his twitter feed lately? I'm pretty sure the guy is a white nationalist. He's made comments about America being only for white people and american born minority republican governors of being "immigrants" who have no place telling Americans what to do. Would it be against guidelines to highlight these statements? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.226.226 ( talk) 16:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Twitter posts? Really? Anyone can post or say literally anything they want on Twitter, it is not a credible source, yet you people refer to twitter and tumblr as if they're academic publications. (
50.53.159.101 (
talk) 20:24, 12 May 2016 (UTC))
It's his own words. How is that not a credible source? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.227.118.93 (
talk) 00:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
The Guardian "source" was not a actual FBI document. Nor has the proud Boys been labeled terrorists. Unlike ANTIFA, which wiki will not post IS labeled a far left terrorist group by DHS and the FBI in Sept 2017. PatrioticMiguel ( talk) 10:58, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
^Confirmed. - FBI Says Proud Boys Are Not An Extremist Group I hold that his categorization on this page as a 'Canadian White Nationalist' should be removed, as well as the pointless and fallacious blurb about the SPLC designating the Proud Boys a 'general hate' group. Please refer to this article in regards to the SPLC, and their fast-and-loose defaming behavior: The SPLC Has Lost All Credibility These articles are from the left-leaning Washington Post as well, mind you. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 07:57, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Signals that a news organization engages in fact-checking and has a reputation for accuracy are the publication of corrections and disclosures of conflicts of interest.Sites like Breitbart aren't reliable sources in substantial part because they publish known falsehoods or blatant misrepresentations of the truth and never bother to correct them. There is a longstanding consensus that the SPLC's opinions are relevant and acceptable as a source for Wikipedia. That you disagree with this consensus is interesting but dispositive of nothing. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 08:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Uh no. This is a pattern with the SPLC. They currently have over 800 pending lawsuits against them for defamation. And in the case of Maajid Nawaz, they didn't correct their decrees on him after a polite request... he had to drag them to court (for which he was awarded 3.4 million USD). This leads me to believe you aren't even reading the sources I'm providing. Also, why did you bring up Breitbart? I did not cite them. I think you're making some dull assumptions here. Did I assume that everyone who's making these baseless claims about Gavin and using shaky sources to back them up, are members of Antifa? No I did not. So why did you assume I'm some boob who guzzles whatever Breitbart spits out? It's pretty obvious that some of you have a clear bias here, and as such are utilizing sources that confirm that bias. Your displays of faux-intellectualism and attempts to feign rational high-ground are laughable. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 23:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
It's an accurate assessment of the behavior of individuals like yourself, who as I have stated before have a clear bias, and are willfully ignoring and dismissing sources and evidence to confirm that bias. None of you who seem to be clutching this article in a tight-fist are in any way broadly informed on the subject, and can't be bothered to be either. There is some intense laziness and hollow posturing going on here. Hence why I referred to you as 'faux-intellectuals'. If you find that term offensive, then I can only conclude some of you are extremely overly-sensitive and emotionally weak. Several of you have made ludicrous assumptions (citing Breitbart for God knows what reason), and in your case, 'Grayfell' you've put words in my mouth. If I wanted to call you idiots I would. In fact I'd probably use some stronger language than that. But this is me being markedly civil and exercising a lot of restraint. I'm sorry that some of you feel threatened by me questioning your judgement, your sources, and your reasoning. But I will continue to do so. None of you hold absolute ownership on truth. Isn't that the essence of what this site is intended to be? The fact that you keep pretending that I'm in some way attacking you is ridiculous. I have a point and I'm arguing it in a civilized manner. If you can't deal with that, then maybe some serious introspection is called for. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 00:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't it really say he's English-Scottish-Canadian? That's what he is, not just English-Canadian. He was born in England, to Scottish Parents and then moved to Canada at a young age. 86.2.213.86 ( talk) 00:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
No, because according to wikipedia guidelines (See WP:Ethnicity), place of birth, ethnicity, and previous nationalities are not included in the lead unless relevant to notability. The country and nationality under which he became notable was Canada. Hence we only include "Canadian" in the lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apoorva Iyer ( talk • contribs) 08:33, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
The second paragraph in Personal life starts with "McInnes adheres to libertarianism" then goes on to describe his nationalist views. Libertarian views include support for free trade, open borders, and individual choice in culture and language — not protectionism, closed borders, cultural authoritarianism. The paragraph should open with "McInnes adheres to nationalism." Benjamin5152414 ( talk) 05:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
This article has "United States" under the citizenship section, but from my understanding he doesn't hold American citizenship. He does live in the US though. Pc Retro ( talk) 19:25, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I believe that he also did a recent interview with Joe Rogan where he said that he didn't have his citizenship yet. THE DIAZ talk • contribs 05:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/shithead/Content?oid=916643
Victor Grigas ( talk) 01:44, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
You guys say he's been called racist by Salon, Jezebel, Slate, and Feminist Current...those super liberal sites will call anyone racist or "problematic." Why are sites like these considered valid sources but not sites such as Daily Wire, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Zero Hedge, Drudge Report, etc? This is not liberalpedia...I don't understand why Wikipedia has become so biased. Ktm4391 ( talk) 11:22, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Meant to say sexist. Its hard to remember since these types of outlets will call you both at the same time. Ktm4391 ( talk) 13:42, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
K.e.coffman, I don't understand why you reverted and re-added the bit about the media describing McInnes as alt-right. The cited source doesn't appear reliable, and it doesn't say anything about how the media describes McInnes. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 23:23, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
McInnes is not alt-right and, in fact, constantly talks about how he dislikes the alt-right. This should be changed as McInnes has stated multiple times over the years that he is a Libertarian and part of the new-right movement. Adding the new right and libertarianism into the alt-right category is simply not factual and should be changed on this page to reflect that fact. CoopDEtat19 ( talk) 13:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
This article is about a British born Canadian citizen who now resides in the US, with the article using Canadian English. Quinton Feldberg edited the date format to mdy with . Canada uses dmy, so should this article not use that? Emir of Wikipedia ( talk) 20:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Is Canadaland a reliable source? The specific source and content can be found in this edit. The content (that McInnes no longer works for The Rebel) is unexceptional, but I haven't managed to find any evidence that Canadaland has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Surely there are better sources out there? -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 03:44, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
@ DrFleischman: - Sorry, I'm a bit of a Wikipedia noob. Would you mind explaining more about why you reverted my Gavin McInnes edit here? https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gavin_McInnes&oldid=prev&diff=810359833 I looked at Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources; here are some parts that seemed relevant: "Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject." ... "Primary sources are often difficult to use appropriately. Although they can be both reliable and useful in certain situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research. Although specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred." So, the Proud Boys website is not objective... but it still seems like a great source for supporting information about a viewpoint that's being held on a particular subject here. And I don't think I did any original research here. Just provided a specific fact.-- Clevera ( talk) 04:14, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
This has taken an aggressive tone and I'm not interested in discussing this further. I think I've elaborated on my views enough. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 19:08, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting we use it but it might get more attention later. [4]. Doug Weller talk 20:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
The fact that his wife is Native American should be included. Especially in the light of the fact that he is accused of being a white nationalist. Knox1998 ( talk) 02:02, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
WP:NOTFORUM |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Gavin McInnes is pro Israel (not anti Israel) and opposes racial politics - if I thought you honestly did not know this and took his jokes and ironic statements (designed, for example, to WAKE UP Jews and show them that their real enemies are on the left) literally, I would engage in dialogue with you. But you do NOT seriously believe that Gavin McInnes is an anti-Semite or someone who believes that people with white skin are genetically superior, you know perfectly well that he does NOT hold these positions. The article is just a smear job - so attempts at long and serious dialogue with you would be a waste of time. 2A02:C7D:B47A:C900:8C4C:57BA:70BA:D4EA ( talk) 08:20, 18 August 2018 (UTC) |
There may be some good material here: Proud Boys Founder: How He Went From Brooklyn Hipster to Far-Right Provocateur Kendall-K1 ( talk) 12:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
A new video showing Gavin saying the n word "nigger" has been shown, should we include it in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.209.223.112 ( talk) 07:31, 22 October 2018
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@ PeterTheFourth: I have again removed Category:Canadian white nationalists per WP:BLP policy. We do not have a source that says McInnes is a white nationalist. All we have is the report from Washington State police saying that the FBI says his group is white nationalist. We also have McInnes's denial and previous discussion on this talk page on this matter. Do not re-add this without discussing here first. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 13:32, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
It looks to me that the consensus in the discussion at BLPN is that the category should be added. Just counting noses, I make it 11-6-1 (Seraphim System abstaining). If there's a disagreement about this assessment, an uninvolved admin should be rounded up to do a formal close. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Baseless. The consensus here is that some of you guys have convinced yourself that he's a Nazi/White nationalist, with no real facts. If someone denounces an ideology and POV, and does not openly demonstrate behavior or actions that are racist/bigoted etc. then you have no way of knowing if they subscribe to such ideals. You would have to read their mind to know for sure. This is childish, paranoid, and asinine. Here's some real sources: The FBI says the Proud Boys are not an extremist group after all The Southern Poverty Law Center has lost all credibility SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER SETTLES LAWSUIT AFTER FALSELY LABELING ‘EXTREMIST’ ORGANIZATION — Preceding unsigned comment added by AspectRatiocination ( talk • contribs) 08:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
This is going to have to be a quick rebuttal. Because it's become quite clear I have far less time on my hands than a lot of you do. 1. He said he regretted that comment and it was poorly worded. 2. Did you seriously link that infamous 'milk is racist' article? Haha. That was confirmed to be yet another 4Chan troll that weevil'd it's way into the current zeitgeist. Just as they intended.
You guys are woefully predictable. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 01:07, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Uh huh. Let me repeat the relevant quote, which has fuck-all to do with your handwaving:
I suspect that these areas are deliberately misleading. Gavin is pro Israel, in the videos mentioned he knew they would be taken out of context because his jokes are clearly and obviously taken out of context and deliberately lied about. ZozPrime ( talk) 05:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I've seen here people debating whether McInnes is a white nationalist/alt-right or not (for the record, I believe he is both things, but that is neither here nor there). But come on, one thing we should all agree on is that he definitely is far-right. I say it because I'm the one who put "far-right" in the article's introduction, and someone changed that to "right-wing". I present to you: 1) an article from the reliable source New York Times considering him far-right, right from its very title (and it's an article which has been criticised by several people for allegedly being too little critical/too benevolent, to boot; you can disagree, of course, but that means it's not exactly Antifa propaganda); 2) the FBI (not the SPLC or some potentially controversial source like that, no; the friggin' Trump-administration FBI) considering the group he founded an extremist group. So... the Proud Boys are extremists but he miraculously isn't? Despite having cut ties from them only (literally) yesterday? Please, let's be reasonable; let me describe him as "far-right-wing" in the introduction, because if someone like that represents the not-far right then Susan Collins must be a goddamn commie. ( 85.219.14.10 ( talk) 20:29, 22 November 2018 (UTC))
![]() | This
edit request to
Gavin McInnes has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the section Gavin McInnes#Views replace
In 2003 McInnes said, "I don't want our culture diluted. We need to close the borders now and let everyone assimilate to a Western, English-speaking way of life."
with
In 2003 McInnes said, "I don't want our culture diluted. We need to close the borders now and let everyone assimilate to a Western, white, English-speaking way of life."
which corrects the quote per the source. Galobtter ( pingó mió) 15:02, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Comment I think we have enough support ... maybe admins are sleepy from eating too much Thanksgiving pie ... Seraphim System ( talk) 13:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
Beyond My Ken ( talk) 22:28, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Gavin McInnes has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Replace "far-right-wing" in the second paragraph of the lead section with "far-right". "far-right-wing" seems to be a seldom used, and non-standard term. — SpanishSnake ( talk | contribs) 23:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
There is no source to the FBI report that supposedly indicates the Proud Boys are an extremist organization with ties to white nationalism. The sole source for this is a single Internal Affairs document which is defending the Clark County Sheriff's department from a discrimination and harassment lawsuit. I might add the department settled the lawsuit out of court for $775,000.
The said author of the internal affairs report, Michael McCabe, told the Guardian that the FBI revealed the classification of the Proud Boys as an extremist group during an Aug. 2 briefing at Clark County’s west precinct. It is quite possible that McCabe simply misconstrued what the FBI during the briefing. A cynic might think that since the department fired the deputy for selling Proud Girls shirts, it might be VERY easy for the department to mischaracterize the FBI's briefing.
The Guardian indicated "the FBI did not directly address the designation or the briefing in response to specific email questions."
The FBI did release a statement to multiple media sources in which they stated "Our focus is not on membership in particular groups but on individuals who commit violence and criminal activity that constitutes a federal crime or poses a threat to national security," the statement also said. "The FBI does not and will not police ideology."
The introduction "He is the founder of the Proud Boys, a chauvinist men's group considered an extremist organization by the FBI and the Southern Poverty Law Center.[6]" needs to be changed to remove the FBI designation as it is simply not supported. This did not come from the FBI but a single document from a Sheriff's department with less that 450 employees. Joe young90 ( talk) 06:45, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
An editor keeps attempting to describe the FBI agent who disavowed that the FBI classified the Proud Boys as an "extremist group with ties to white nationalists" as "a Senior FBI official", when, in fact, the source provided only refers to him as "Oregon FBI Special Agent in Charge" and "Head of the Oregon office". I am not familiar with the FBI's bureaucracy, so I have no real idea if the head of the Oregon office is a "Senior FBI official" or not, but I suspect that it's kind of a middle-level position, high enough to be the head of a regional office, but not the most important of those. Be that as it may, that's my opinion, and we don't go by the opinions of editors, we go by what our sources say, and the source provided does not describe him as a "Senior official", it describes him as "Special Agent in Charge of the Oregon office". If the editor wishes to describe the person as a "Senior FBI official", then they must get a source that describes him that way. Until he does, I am reverting back to the earlier version, which accurately reports what the source says. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 23:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
McInnes is currently in the "Canadian White Nationalists" category however the section for McInnes on the
WP:BLPN page only shows 8 in support of McInnes being in this category and 7 opposing (the section also seems to still be open so it has not closed yet). Is that enough consensus for him to be added to the WN category? Also one of the users on the BLPN page noted there are no RS supporting McInnes being a white nationalist, and he has also repeatedly denied being a WN or supporting racism (he seems to identify more as "new right" or "paleo/libertarian right". I have no dog in this fight, for the record McInnes seems like kind of a pugnacious macho jerk, but why do so many users here seem to be fighting really hard to put him in the white nationalist category?
IAFIS (
talk) 09:56, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Question: Should the intro describe McInness, in Wikipedia's voice, as 'far-right', or should it say that he has been characterized in that manner by X and Y sources and then add how he characterizes himself (which, it seems, is 'alt-light', according to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQCZ9izaCa4). Happy monsoon day 00:45, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@Beyond My Ken, in reference to this edit [8], can you please point to me where in the source [9] the reference is made to 'entire'? It's not clear why we would add this emphasis in the Wikipedia voice. His exact language is "We do not intend and did not intend to designate the group as extremist." So, if he meant that "We do not intend and did not intend to designate the entire group as extremist," wouldn't he have done so then? I am confused about why we're inserting this additional characterization to the FBI's characterization. What do others think? Happy monsoon day 01:44, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Two weeks later the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Oregon office said that it had not been their intent to label the entire group as "extremist", only to characterize the possible threat from certain members of the group that way.I'm not sure what clarity could possibly be gained by omitting the word "entire". Brad v🍁 01:01, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
no consensus for requested edit, and we're getting into WP:NOTFORUM territory now | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
In the section Vice Media after
add
before the footnote. Source is the footnote already there. 84.177.91.145 ( talk) 00:05, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
The article in the New York Times Style Section that we use as one of the two sources for our hipster quote says:
@ Grayfell: Is this also WP:SYNTH: McInnes talks about a NYT Style Section cover where he is mentioned. According to the NYT archives there is only one NYT Style Section cover where he is mentioned. So we can conclude that this is the NYT Style Section cover that he is talking about -- 84.177.91.25 ( talk) 01:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
|
Although Gavin McInnes now lives in North America he is actually from Britain (as one can tell from his accent), his humour is in the British tradition of IRONY - to interpret him in the Puritan American fashion (as people in the "mainstream media" or universities might do) is, therefore, in error. And American SJWs are very much Puritans who have replaced religion with politics (but have kept the "Blue Laws" Puritan attitudes).
To call Mr McInnes a "Fascist" is absurd, and to call him a hater of Jews (an anti-Semite) is also absurd. This is not my "personal opinion" - ASK HIM. Real Fascists are not shy of saying they want the state to control the economy by regulations (the basis of the policy of Mussolini in Italy - imitated, in a watered down way, by the "National Industrial Recovery Act" and "National Recovery Agency", the "Blue Eagle" types, in the United States in 1933 and struck down by the Supreme Court, nine justices to zero, in 1935). Nor are real anti-Semites shy of saying that "Palestine should be free from the river to the sea" (i.e. six million dead Jews), a popular cry in some American universities. Mr Gavin McInnes in spite of his faults (such as regrettable taste in music) most certainly does NOT want the government to control the economy with its edicts and controls (Fascism), and most certainly does NOT want Israel to be destroyed, or American Jews to have their property "redistributed" (as so many radicals on the left wish). Again NOT my "personal opinion" - just the basic facts about the opinions of Mr McInnes. None of this is very complicated - and any person of good will could find out what the real political opinions of Gavin McInnes are quite easily. Perhaps good will is in rather short supply among certain article writers. 2A02:C7D:B48D:1200:2449:9B2B:1777:7BE7 ( talk) 20:39, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
![]() | This
edit request to
Gavin McInnes has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Citation needed for the claim that Gavin McInnes is a "far-right" political commentator. A NY Times opinion article isn't a good citation. 2601:408:700:6170:595F:6F31:FA56:4CF5 ( talk) 02:07, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
Biased political organizations shouldn't be considered sources since they have no incentive to be accurate. By using one of them, you are going against the Neutral Point of View of wikipedia.
There needs to be another source for his controversies than Media Matters. Rush Limbaugh wouldn't be considered an acceptable source for a page about Obama for the same reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.7.197.70 ( talk) 11:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Has anyone seen his twitter feed lately? I'm pretty sure the guy is a white nationalist. He's made comments about America being only for white people and american born minority republican governors of being "immigrants" who have no place telling Americans what to do. Would it be against guidelines to highlight these statements? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.226.226 ( talk) 16:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Twitter posts? Really? Anyone can post or say literally anything they want on Twitter, it is not a credible source, yet you people refer to twitter and tumblr as if they're academic publications. (
50.53.159.101 (
talk) 20:24, 12 May 2016 (UTC))
It's his own words. How is that not a credible source? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.227.118.93 (
talk) 00:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
The Guardian "source" was not a actual FBI document. Nor has the proud Boys been labeled terrorists. Unlike ANTIFA, which wiki will not post IS labeled a far left terrorist group by DHS and the FBI in Sept 2017. PatrioticMiguel ( talk) 10:58, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
^Confirmed. - FBI Says Proud Boys Are Not An Extremist Group I hold that his categorization on this page as a 'Canadian White Nationalist' should be removed, as well as the pointless and fallacious blurb about the SPLC designating the Proud Boys a 'general hate' group. Please refer to this article in regards to the SPLC, and their fast-and-loose defaming behavior: The SPLC Has Lost All Credibility These articles are from the left-leaning Washington Post as well, mind you. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 07:57, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Signals that a news organization engages in fact-checking and has a reputation for accuracy are the publication of corrections and disclosures of conflicts of interest.Sites like Breitbart aren't reliable sources in substantial part because they publish known falsehoods or blatant misrepresentations of the truth and never bother to correct them. There is a longstanding consensus that the SPLC's opinions are relevant and acceptable as a source for Wikipedia. That you disagree with this consensus is interesting but dispositive of nothing. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 08:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Uh no. This is a pattern with the SPLC. They currently have over 800 pending lawsuits against them for defamation. And in the case of Maajid Nawaz, they didn't correct their decrees on him after a polite request... he had to drag them to court (for which he was awarded 3.4 million USD). This leads me to believe you aren't even reading the sources I'm providing. Also, why did you bring up Breitbart? I did not cite them. I think you're making some dull assumptions here. Did I assume that everyone who's making these baseless claims about Gavin and using shaky sources to back them up, are members of Antifa? No I did not. So why did you assume I'm some boob who guzzles whatever Breitbart spits out? It's pretty obvious that some of you have a clear bias here, and as such are utilizing sources that confirm that bias. Your displays of faux-intellectualism and attempts to feign rational high-ground are laughable. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 23:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
It's an accurate assessment of the behavior of individuals like yourself, who as I have stated before have a clear bias, and are willfully ignoring and dismissing sources and evidence to confirm that bias. None of you who seem to be clutching this article in a tight-fist are in any way broadly informed on the subject, and can't be bothered to be either. There is some intense laziness and hollow posturing going on here. Hence why I referred to you as 'faux-intellectuals'. If you find that term offensive, then I can only conclude some of you are extremely overly-sensitive and emotionally weak. Several of you have made ludicrous assumptions (citing Breitbart for God knows what reason), and in your case, 'Grayfell' you've put words in my mouth. If I wanted to call you idiots I would. In fact I'd probably use some stronger language than that. But this is me being markedly civil and exercising a lot of restraint. I'm sorry that some of you feel threatened by me questioning your judgement, your sources, and your reasoning. But I will continue to do so. None of you hold absolute ownership on truth. Isn't that the essence of what this site is intended to be? The fact that you keep pretending that I'm in some way attacking you is ridiculous. I have a point and I'm arguing it in a civilized manner. If you can't deal with that, then maybe some serious introspection is called for. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 00:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't it really say he's English-Scottish-Canadian? That's what he is, not just English-Canadian. He was born in England, to Scottish Parents and then moved to Canada at a young age. 86.2.213.86 ( talk) 00:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
No, because according to wikipedia guidelines (See WP:Ethnicity), place of birth, ethnicity, and previous nationalities are not included in the lead unless relevant to notability. The country and nationality under which he became notable was Canada. Hence we only include "Canadian" in the lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apoorva Iyer ( talk • contribs) 08:33, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
The second paragraph in Personal life starts with "McInnes adheres to libertarianism" then goes on to describe his nationalist views. Libertarian views include support for free trade, open borders, and individual choice in culture and language — not protectionism, closed borders, cultural authoritarianism. The paragraph should open with "McInnes adheres to nationalism." Benjamin5152414 ( talk) 05:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
This article has "United States" under the citizenship section, but from my understanding he doesn't hold American citizenship. He does live in the US though. Pc Retro ( talk) 19:25, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
I believe that he also did a recent interview with Joe Rogan where he said that he didn't have his citizenship yet. THE DIAZ talk • contribs 05:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/shithead/Content?oid=916643
Victor Grigas ( talk) 01:44, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
You guys say he's been called racist by Salon, Jezebel, Slate, and Feminist Current...those super liberal sites will call anyone racist or "problematic." Why are sites like these considered valid sources but not sites such as Daily Wire, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Zero Hedge, Drudge Report, etc? This is not liberalpedia...I don't understand why Wikipedia has become so biased. Ktm4391 ( talk) 11:22, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Meant to say sexist. Its hard to remember since these types of outlets will call you both at the same time. Ktm4391 ( talk) 13:42, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
K.e.coffman, I don't understand why you reverted and re-added the bit about the media describing McInnes as alt-right. The cited source doesn't appear reliable, and it doesn't say anything about how the media describes McInnes. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 23:23, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
McInnes is not alt-right and, in fact, constantly talks about how he dislikes the alt-right. This should be changed as McInnes has stated multiple times over the years that he is a Libertarian and part of the new-right movement. Adding the new right and libertarianism into the alt-right category is simply not factual and should be changed on this page to reflect that fact. CoopDEtat19 ( talk) 13:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
This article is about a British born Canadian citizen who now resides in the US, with the article using Canadian English. Quinton Feldberg edited the date format to mdy with . Canada uses dmy, so should this article not use that? Emir of Wikipedia ( talk) 20:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Is Canadaland a reliable source? The specific source and content can be found in this edit. The content (that McInnes no longer works for The Rebel) is unexceptional, but I haven't managed to find any evidence that Canadaland has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Surely there are better sources out there? -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 03:44, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
@ DrFleischman: - Sorry, I'm a bit of a Wikipedia noob. Would you mind explaining more about why you reverted my Gavin McInnes edit here? https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gavin_McInnes&oldid=prev&diff=810359833 I looked at Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources; here are some parts that seemed relevant: "Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. Sometimes non-neutral sources are the best possible sources for supporting information about the different viewpoints held on a subject." ... "Primary sources are often difficult to use appropriately. Although they can be both reliable and useful in certain situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research. Although specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred." So, the Proud Boys website is not objective... but it still seems like a great source for supporting information about a viewpoint that's being held on a particular subject here. And I don't think I did any original research here. Just provided a specific fact.-- Clevera ( talk) 04:14, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
This has taken an aggressive tone and I'm not interested in discussing this further. I think I've elaborated on my views enough. -- Dr. Fleischman ( talk) 19:08, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting we use it but it might get more attention later. [4]. Doug Weller talk 20:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
The fact that his wife is Native American should be included. Especially in the light of the fact that he is accused of being a white nationalist. Knox1998 ( talk) 02:02, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
WP:NOTFORUM |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Gavin McInnes is pro Israel (not anti Israel) and opposes racial politics - if I thought you honestly did not know this and took his jokes and ironic statements (designed, for example, to WAKE UP Jews and show them that their real enemies are on the left) literally, I would engage in dialogue with you. But you do NOT seriously believe that Gavin McInnes is an anti-Semite or someone who believes that people with white skin are genetically superior, you know perfectly well that he does NOT hold these positions. The article is just a smear job - so attempts at long and serious dialogue with you would be a waste of time. 2A02:C7D:B47A:C900:8C4C:57BA:70BA:D4EA ( talk) 08:20, 18 August 2018 (UTC) |
There may be some good material here: Proud Boys Founder: How He Went From Brooklyn Hipster to Far-Right Provocateur Kendall-K1 ( talk) 12:38, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
A new video showing Gavin saying the n word "nigger" has been shown, should we include it in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.209.223.112 ( talk) 07:31, 22 October 2018
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@ PeterTheFourth: I have again removed Category:Canadian white nationalists per WP:BLP policy. We do not have a source that says McInnes is a white nationalist. All we have is the report from Washington State police saying that the FBI says his group is white nationalist. We also have McInnes's denial and previous discussion on this talk page on this matter. Do not re-add this without discussing here first. Kendall-K1 ( talk) 13:32, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
It looks to me that the consensus in the discussion at BLPN is that the category should be added. Just counting noses, I make it 11-6-1 (Seraphim System abstaining). If there's a disagreement about this assessment, an uninvolved admin should be rounded up to do a formal close. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
Baseless. The consensus here is that some of you guys have convinced yourself that he's a Nazi/White nationalist, with no real facts. If someone denounces an ideology and POV, and does not openly demonstrate behavior or actions that are racist/bigoted etc. then you have no way of knowing if they subscribe to such ideals. You would have to read their mind to know for sure. This is childish, paranoid, and asinine. Here's some real sources: The FBI says the Proud Boys are not an extremist group after all The Southern Poverty Law Center has lost all credibility SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER SETTLES LAWSUIT AFTER FALSELY LABELING ‘EXTREMIST’ ORGANIZATION — Preceding unsigned comment added by AspectRatiocination ( talk • contribs) 08:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
This is going to have to be a quick rebuttal. Because it's become quite clear I have far less time on my hands than a lot of you do. 1. He said he regretted that comment and it was poorly worded. 2. Did you seriously link that infamous 'milk is racist' article? Haha. That was confirmed to be yet another 4Chan troll that weevil'd it's way into the current zeitgeist. Just as they intended.
You guys are woefully predictable. AspectRatiocination ( talk) 01:07, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Uh huh. Let me repeat the relevant quote, which has fuck-all to do with your handwaving:
I suspect that these areas are deliberately misleading. Gavin is pro Israel, in the videos mentioned he knew they would be taken out of context because his jokes are clearly and obviously taken out of context and deliberately lied about. ZozPrime ( talk) 05:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I've seen here people debating whether McInnes is a white nationalist/alt-right or not (for the record, I believe he is both things, but that is neither here nor there). But come on, one thing we should all agree on is that he definitely is far-right. I say it because I'm the one who put "far-right" in the article's introduction, and someone changed that to "right-wing". I present to you: 1) an article from the reliable source New York Times considering him far-right, right from its very title (and it's an article which has been criticised by several people for allegedly being too little critical/too benevolent, to boot; you can disagree, of course, but that means it's not exactly Antifa propaganda); 2) the FBI (not the SPLC or some potentially controversial source like that, no; the friggin' Trump-administration FBI) considering the group he founded an extremist group. So... the Proud Boys are extremists but he miraculously isn't? Despite having cut ties from them only (literally) yesterday? Please, let's be reasonable; let me describe him as "far-right-wing" in the introduction, because if someone like that represents the not-far right then Susan Collins must be a goddamn commie. ( 85.219.14.10 ( talk) 20:29, 22 November 2018 (UTC))
![]() | This
edit request to
Gavin McInnes has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the section Gavin McInnes#Views replace
In 2003 McInnes said, "I don't want our culture diluted. We need to close the borders now and let everyone assimilate to a Western, English-speaking way of life."
with
In 2003 McInnes said, "I don't want our culture diluted. We need to close the borders now and let everyone assimilate to a Western, white, English-speaking way of life."
which corrects the quote per the source. Galobtter ( pingó mió) 15:02, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Comment I think we have enough support ... maybe admins are sleepy from eating too much Thanksgiving pie ... Seraphim System ( talk) 13:36, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
Beyond My Ken ( talk) 22:28, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Gavin McInnes has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Replace "far-right-wing" in the second paragraph of the lead section with "far-right". "far-right-wing" seems to be a seldom used, and non-standard term. — SpanishSnake ( talk | contribs) 23:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
There is no source to the FBI report that supposedly indicates the Proud Boys are an extremist organization with ties to white nationalism. The sole source for this is a single Internal Affairs document which is defending the Clark County Sheriff's department from a discrimination and harassment lawsuit. I might add the department settled the lawsuit out of court for $775,000.
The said author of the internal affairs report, Michael McCabe, told the Guardian that the FBI revealed the classification of the Proud Boys as an extremist group during an Aug. 2 briefing at Clark County’s west precinct. It is quite possible that McCabe simply misconstrued what the FBI during the briefing. A cynic might think that since the department fired the deputy for selling Proud Girls shirts, it might be VERY easy for the department to mischaracterize the FBI's briefing.
The Guardian indicated "the FBI did not directly address the designation or the briefing in response to specific email questions."
The FBI did release a statement to multiple media sources in which they stated "Our focus is not on membership in particular groups but on individuals who commit violence and criminal activity that constitutes a federal crime or poses a threat to national security," the statement also said. "The FBI does not and will not police ideology."
The introduction "He is the founder of the Proud Boys, a chauvinist men's group considered an extremist organization by the FBI and the Southern Poverty Law Center.[6]" needs to be changed to remove the FBI designation as it is simply not supported. This did not come from the FBI but a single document from a Sheriff's department with less that 450 employees. Joe young90 ( talk) 06:45, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
An editor keeps attempting to describe the FBI agent who disavowed that the FBI classified the Proud Boys as an "extremist group with ties to white nationalists" as "a Senior FBI official", when, in fact, the source provided only refers to him as "Oregon FBI Special Agent in Charge" and "Head of the Oregon office". I am not familiar with the FBI's bureaucracy, so I have no real idea if the head of the Oregon office is a "Senior FBI official" or not, but I suspect that it's kind of a middle-level position, high enough to be the head of a regional office, but not the most important of those. Be that as it may, that's my opinion, and we don't go by the opinions of editors, we go by what our sources say, and the source provided does not describe him as a "Senior official", it describes him as "Special Agent in Charge of the Oregon office". If the editor wishes to describe the person as a "Senior FBI official", then they must get a source that describes him that way. Until he does, I am reverting back to the earlier version, which accurately reports what the source says. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 23:40, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
McInnes is currently in the "Canadian White Nationalists" category however the section for McInnes on the
WP:BLPN page only shows 8 in support of McInnes being in this category and 7 opposing (the section also seems to still be open so it has not closed yet). Is that enough consensus for him to be added to the WN category? Also one of the users on the BLPN page noted there are no RS supporting McInnes being a white nationalist, and he has also repeatedly denied being a WN or supporting racism (he seems to identify more as "new right" or "paleo/libertarian right". I have no dog in this fight, for the record McInnes seems like kind of a pugnacious macho jerk, but why do so many users here seem to be fighting really hard to put him in the white nationalist category?
IAFIS (
talk) 09:56, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Question: Should the intro describe McInness, in Wikipedia's voice, as 'far-right', or should it say that he has been characterized in that manner by X and Y sources and then add how he characterizes himself (which, it seems, is 'alt-light', according to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQCZ9izaCa4). Happy monsoon day 00:45, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@Beyond My Ken, in reference to this edit [8], can you please point to me where in the source [9] the reference is made to 'entire'? It's not clear why we would add this emphasis in the Wikipedia voice. His exact language is "We do not intend and did not intend to designate the group as extremist." So, if he meant that "We do not intend and did not intend to designate the entire group as extremist," wouldn't he have done so then? I am confused about why we're inserting this additional characterization to the FBI's characterization. What do others think? Happy monsoon day 01:44, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
Two weeks later the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Oregon office said that it had not been their intent to label the entire group as "extremist", only to characterize the possible threat from certain members of the group that way.I'm not sure what clarity could possibly be gained by omitting the word "entire". Brad v🍁 01:01, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
no consensus for requested edit, and we're getting into WP:NOTFORUM territory now | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
In the section Vice Media after
add
before the footnote. Source is the footnote already there. 84.177.91.145 ( talk) 00:05, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
The article in the New York Times Style Section that we use as one of the two sources for our hipster quote says:
@ Grayfell: Is this also WP:SYNTH: McInnes talks about a NYT Style Section cover where he is mentioned. According to the NYT archives there is only one NYT Style Section cover where he is mentioned. So we can conclude that this is the NYT Style Section cover that he is talking about -- 84.177.91.25 ( talk) 01:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
|
Although Gavin McInnes now lives in North America he is actually from Britain (as one can tell from his accent), his humour is in the British tradition of IRONY - to interpret him in the Puritan American fashion (as people in the "mainstream media" or universities might do) is, therefore, in error. And American SJWs are very much Puritans who have replaced religion with politics (but have kept the "Blue Laws" Puritan attitudes).
To call Mr McInnes a "Fascist" is absurd, and to call him a hater of Jews (an anti-Semite) is also absurd. This is not my "personal opinion" - ASK HIM. Real Fascists are not shy of saying they want the state to control the economy by regulations (the basis of the policy of Mussolini in Italy - imitated, in a watered down way, by the "National Industrial Recovery Act" and "National Recovery Agency", the "Blue Eagle" types, in the United States in 1933 and struck down by the Supreme Court, nine justices to zero, in 1935). Nor are real anti-Semites shy of saying that "Palestine should be free from the river to the sea" (i.e. six million dead Jews), a popular cry in some American universities. Mr Gavin McInnes in spite of his faults (such as regrettable taste in music) most certainly does NOT want the government to control the economy with its edicts and controls (Fascism), and most certainly does NOT want Israel to be destroyed, or American Jews to have their property "redistributed" (as so many radicals on the left wish). Again NOT my "personal opinion" - just the basic facts about the opinions of Mr McInnes. None of this is very complicated - and any person of good will could find out what the real political opinions of Gavin McInnes are quite easily. Perhaps good will is in rather short supply among certain article writers. 2A02:C7D:B48D:1200:2449:9B2B:1777:7BE7 ( talk) 20:39, 13 January 2019 (UTC)