This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Save Our State article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Like Wikipedia, they have an "open publishing" process in which anyone can submit an article. I notice they are referenced a lot in this and other articles. Is this appropriate? Panfakes 12:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Attempted to correct outrageous NPOV issues in the article, such as removing references to "undocumented workers."
I believe the article is much closer to neutral now.
Also attempted to correct usage issues, such as "SOS'".
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.21.130.92 ( talk • contribs)
When I found this article it was a stub and extremely POV. In my rewrite, I have used the terms "illegal immigrant" and "undocumented worker" interchangeably, despite the fact that the latter is the preferred, politically-correct term (my attempt at balance). Most of the info is from newspaper articles about SOS activities, some of which I have saved on my hard drive, others of which are still out there on the internet. I have yet to cite my sources, provide external links, or finish the article--there are still a few important aspects of the group and its opposition that merit inclusion. I hope that once the article is finished it will not attract so much vandalism and POV-pushing, but until then, might I make a passioned plea for calm? Can I also ask the non-registered contributers to register an account, or at the very least sign their comments on talk pages and include edit summaries on changes?-- Rockero 00:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The term used in the text of immigration law is "undocumented aliens". Use that as the neutral term. 66.245.214.251 21:28, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the term "political correctness" should be changed to "fear of charges of racism." "Political correctness" is a biased colloquialism. 66.245.214.251 21:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
"Undocumented" worker/immigrant etc. are absurd colloquial neologisms. The term used in US law is "illegal alien." Use that as the neutral term.
Here's a page with terminology: http://uscis.gov/graphics/glossary.htm
Why was this page tagged as miscellany for deletion. It's an article, so the tag should be {{subst:afd}}. Bjones 14:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I am removing the tag, as there is no discussion page about it, and thus no discussion. Zuzim 18:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
The miscreant who is vandalizing this article is someone who hates SOS. The edits he puts in are incorrect and his opinion, not factual.
71.116.241.196 21:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I removed the two Indymedia links because the pictures in both those links WERE NOT of Save Our State members. Same thing with that "anti=immigration" link. If you are going to post links that are supposedly of SOS, please make sure they are correct!! Thank you very much. Happy Bunny 15:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
see SOS in action at Laguna Beach, July 2005
Why are these links being deleted? - Will Beback 00:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)Because those links show pictures of people that are supposed to be SaveOurState members who ARE NOT. The links do not apply. Are you interested in facts or just biased opinions?
Here are some more links from reputable news sources and within past 6 months:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-me-profile27jun27,0,1890555.story?coll=la-news-politics-california (Joe Turner and SOS)
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/politics/13378623.htm (Turner Arrested for shoving someone)
Article on Jesse Diaz, Cofounder of La Tierra es de Todos
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_D_diaz16.1d633b18.html
Elzia
10:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Those were photos taken at SOS demonstrations. 08:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Please see http://www.soychicano.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=811
for more on SOS as a hate group
(UTC)
_____________________________________________
This "article" is completely biased and racist and needs to be deleted! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.201.252 ( talk • contribs)
The first edits that were made that are being called "vandalism" were factual and from the perspective of someone that has observed Save Our State's racist behaviours on over 10 occasions. They were then immediately deleted by Save Our State members. The article is severely slanted even if the language has been modified. Any site that refers to Save Our State as a "civil rights" organization is bizarre.
Elzia
18:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Just the facts please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs) .
This really is garbage although I will leave it in. I quote:
After SOS announced their intention to return to Baldwin Park, notice was placed on the Stormfront website, an "online white nationalist community" headed by former klansman
BIG DEAL
Does the Indymedia entry in WIkipedia state
After IMC was established, terrorist cells in Iran scanned for information on Israeli sympathizers.
Or does the wiki article on Peace Movement Groups say
"RCP members- Maoists - regularly attend ..."
Get the picture?
It is REDBAITING in Reverse.
I was warned that this site was unfair and not open to true factual articles, instead preferring leftist diatribe. I see those warnings were correct.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs)
I Have nothing further to say. I find this entire situation unacceptable and wikipedia is absolutely not interested in the truth. I really could care less what you do with this article and all the inappropriate links. No one who matters reads this site anyway. Hasta lavista baby. I won't be back.
I am so glad I didn't donate any $$ because wiki isn't worth one red cent.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs)
The SOS group is an online political action group, so, they're going to hide any information that's unflattering to SOS. The SOS are not the nazi groups, but, nazis have shown up at nearly all the SOS-organized demonstrations. Some of the earlier SOS demonstrations became focal points for people on stormfront.org, who decided to piggyback their own organizing efforts (as National Vanguard) onto the SOS event. At the second Baldwin Park demonstration, prior to the demo, the fascists had a picnic gathering at a nearby park.
At all times, the SOS leadership have said "we can't control who comes to our demonstrations." I think this is veiled language that indicates that they are content to have fascists support the SOS demonstrations. From the posts on the SOS bulletin board, it is clear that some individuals in SOS are sympathetic to the fascists.
I have attended the last 3 SOS protests and there have been no "Nazi's." The people who make such claims are anarchists, communists, and violent socialists. I have videotapedracist organizations counter-protesting SOS such as the Mexica-Movement and Mecha. The "race card" is played against SOS as an attempt to draw in controversy and smear those who oppose illegal immigration. The people who make such claims are most often racist. - TheWatchdog
Race Hatred, White Nationalism, and the Struggle for Aztlan
from
http://www.soychicano.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=811
"AMERICANS ARE TIRED OF FEELING LIKE A FOREIGNER IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY." [sic] – Joe Turner, "leader," Save Our State
1) SOS is no less a Civil Rights organization than is the SPLC. In this case, SOS advocates for the civil rights of those legally present in the United States.
2) That Prop. 187 was "struck down" is not the entire story. The administration of Gray Davis abandoned the legislation: He did not appeal the ruling, which was the demise of 187.
3) The links provided, calling a radical, wingnut separatist/racialist outfit an "anti-racist" group are absurd.
This article is truly an unfortunate example of the leftist slant that taints wikipedia scholarship. Zuzim 14:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Zuzim 13:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
How does a group that spends its time protesting historical and cultural monuments along with spanish billboards, fall under the title anti-illegal immigrant or pro-secure borders? It also can't be called a civil rights organization because it does not look like SOS is trying to protect anyone's rights when they hang around with aryan supremacy organizations. So why not strip any and all of these "titles," when they don't have citations, from the article once it becomes unlocked? They don't have to be called a nativist group or anything of the sort but neither should they be grouped in with genuine secure borders or immigration reform groups. Mosquito-001 17:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the Watchdog's links should definitely remain because they have footage from actual SOS events. And unfortunately, some of the most complete articles on SOS protests are on Indymedia (which is obviously not the best news source since anyone can publish there. But maybe we can use some?) And I really object to people drawing me into this debate personally. I have never wanted anything but a good article here. That said, I have a SOS article in the personal sandbox User:Rockero/Save Our State. I'm going to add to it a bit more as soon as I get home from the swapmeet, and then I'd like all interested parties (from ALL SIDES) to take a look.-- Rockero 18:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Please delete this article, because what you have up now is an inacurrate article with several external links that have nothing to do with Save Our State. You people would have done great doing propaganda for Nazi Germany.
Hello? I am commenting on this article.
I didn't think it was possible but the other article has less to do with what SOS is about that this article. You guys just keep topping yourselves when it comes to bias bullcrap articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs)
Article unprotected. Happy editing. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @
"Viva Zarqawi the Gringo Killer" is AT LEAST as relevant as the absurd "White Nationalist" connection.
The truth about the bitterly racist, Reconquista movement seeking special rights for foreign nationals living in California goes directly to the issue of the environment in which SOS operates. The hatred the majority of this lot feel for whites and for America is central to understanding SOS.
This hideously slanted article tars SOS with guilt-by-association with "white supremacists," in spite of everything Joe Turner and others have done specifically to disavow and discourage these relationships. Also, a patronising and frankly racist portrait is painted of SOS trying to involve African Americans in the movement.
On the other hand, critical information about the opposition is suppressed -- in an obvious attempt to tilt the article even further -- so that it appears that SOS are a bunch of crackpots. The truth is that the rabid race hate projected by the opposition justifies SOS's means and ends. Wheatabix 06:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
The second event at the monument is refered to as BPII. Please see the SOS page http://www.saveourstate.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=2255&hl=balwin%20park%20II&st=80 This title was also used on indymedia but unfortunately the links may no longer exist or are inaccessible at the moment. The article also does not mention the Garden Grove Protest. The event was not officially held by the SOS, members were in the audience (old preach). During this event a driver allegedly ran over members of the pro-immigration group.
digitalronin 01:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Their members are content spouting 9-11 conspiracy theories instead of being involved with politics on any level. I was just banned from their forums for poking fun at their conspiracy theories, by one big tinfoil hat moderator.
A super-majority of their forum trollers also deny that Democrats in both houses of Congress almost unanimously voted against border enforcement, unanimously voted for amnesty, and have a voting record that goes decades back which mirrors this same open borders pattern. SOS members are content to just bash Bush 24/7. I think allot of them are Democrats In Denial, so they create conspiracy theories in an attempt to grab a hold of the many paradoxes that jumble around in their brains. The SOS guys are going nowhere fast, and they are completely harmless. If you are an open borders freak, I wouldn't worry about them. The worse thing you can do to them, if you wish to retaliate with all your hatred you can muster, is to ignore them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wuggsy ( talk • contribs)
Check it out. SOS members are conspiring to harass a human rights activist by mocking his dead son, who died on the battlefield in Iraq. http://www.saveourstate.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=17054
I have removed a section that was insifficiently sourced under WP:RS. Blogs are not acceptable sources to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The second section sourced by the blog should also be removed unless the youtube citation provided can independently confirm the info. I will be looking into it. Happy editing, TheKaplan 00:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Wasn't the "insufficiently-sourced blog" SaveOurState's own message board?
In regards to YouTube, the user gent2222/AmericanPatriot77 (his latest incarnation is JumpAroundWeird), had all his 400+ videos removed. He, a guy named Dennis, was the videographer for SOS. He/SOS has moved their videos to http://americanpatriot77.com/forums and those videos include the ones banned by YouTube.
For instance, one video is even called "Video of the day laborer that I chased and got his ass arrested!! LOL." The SOS members also include Minuteman members, as they admit in the videos. MM's SOP clearly states that they are not to engage in dialogue or otherwise confront illegal aliens. >:) 68.33.185.185 17:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Lets not prevaricate folks.
I just edited out some comments from this article. The reason I did that is someone added comments that were supposedly mine, when in fact they were NOT comments from me.
I would appreciate it if whoever keeps writing false things that I supposedly said would knock it off. I am the one who left SOS and I know what I said when I left. I have edited the comments to reflect the reality of the situation. I am no longer affiliated with SOS but I wish them well. They are not racists. There maybe are a couple of misguided folks there but for the most part they are sincere Americans whose number one concern is the damage being done to our country by the glut of illegal aliens invading the USA.
So if you are going to edit this article please stick to the facts and the truth.
Thanks, Sandy B.
This section was 100% Original Research. BulldogPete 00:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Some of the sources used in the article fail short. See WP:V and WP:RS. For example, forum postings are not considered reliable sources for Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 18:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I am one of the current officers of Save Our State in Northern CA, Davi Rodrigues, AKA AyatollahGondola, and can provide source quotes for the organization. Rather than dispute the various information here on my own incentive, I can offer the following:
The current web address we are using is http://SaveOurState.info/ Joseph Turner has not been involved in the management since 2009. That I know of, Joseph Turner was never married. Chelene Nightingale was denied any further management role within SOS as of 2009. Save Our State is still active with street level protests, and has been through 2009, 2010, and 2011, in Santa Clarita, Los Angeles, and Sacramento. Save Our State is strategically planning further activities for 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.11.56 ( talk) 04:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Image:SOS-logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I believe this reference is incorrect, and that Turner is unmarried. HedgeFundBob ( talk) 13:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Someone just deleted my edit that was sourced from the Southern Poverty Law Center with the rationale "sorry no blogs", even though the source was not a blog but the SPLC talking out the SOS blogs. This poster also deleted a link to a news article regarding SOS activities in Ojai, California, with no rationale given. I strongly disagree with this kind of editing unless this poster is willing to provide *very* specific links to the Wikipedia policies in question, as none of the sources quoted in my edit were from blogs, and my understanding is that it's okay to source something from an accredited article that talks about blogs. And I'm not aware of any policy that prevents linking to local news coverage. 76.203.149.212 ( talk) 14:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Old text:
I've removed this for a number of reasons. "Was threatened" is a vast mischaracterization of what the reporter said in the first story. If anything, it should say that an adult supporter of SOS wielded pepper spray in self defense over a perceived threat; neither party is reported as directly threatening the other. The second reference is an opinion piece and makes no mention of SOS. Finally, what is really added to the article by mentioning that a member drew pepper spray in self defense at a rally? — C.Fred ( talk) 12:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I was there that day and that's not what happened. The SOS people lied in the street, threatened people with no provocation, and generally acted like thugs and domestic terrorists. Sorry to burst your bubble. 76.175.151.187 ( talk) 13:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:16, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 00:29, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Save Our State. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Save Our State article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Like Wikipedia, they have an "open publishing" process in which anyone can submit an article. I notice they are referenced a lot in this and other articles. Is this appropriate? Panfakes 12:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Attempted to correct outrageous NPOV issues in the article, such as removing references to "undocumented workers."
I believe the article is much closer to neutral now.
Also attempted to correct usage issues, such as "SOS'".
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.21.130.92 ( talk • contribs)
When I found this article it was a stub and extremely POV. In my rewrite, I have used the terms "illegal immigrant" and "undocumented worker" interchangeably, despite the fact that the latter is the preferred, politically-correct term (my attempt at balance). Most of the info is from newspaper articles about SOS activities, some of which I have saved on my hard drive, others of which are still out there on the internet. I have yet to cite my sources, provide external links, or finish the article--there are still a few important aspects of the group and its opposition that merit inclusion. I hope that once the article is finished it will not attract so much vandalism and POV-pushing, but until then, might I make a passioned plea for calm? Can I also ask the non-registered contributers to register an account, or at the very least sign their comments on talk pages and include edit summaries on changes?-- Rockero 00:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The term used in the text of immigration law is "undocumented aliens". Use that as the neutral term. 66.245.214.251 21:28, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the term "political correctness" should be changed to "fear of charges of racism." "Political correctness" is a biased colloquialism. 66.245.214.251 21:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
"Undocumented" worker/immigrant etc. are absurd colloquial neologisms. The term used in US law is "illegal alien." Use that as the neutral term.
Here's a page with terminology: http://uscis.gov/graphics/glossary.htm
Why was this page tagged as miscellany for deletion. It's an article, so the tag should be {{subst:afd}}. Bjones 14:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I am removing the tag, as there is no discussion page about it, and thus no discussion. Zuzim 18:39, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
The miscreant who is vandalizing this article is someone who hates SOS. The edits he puts in are incorrect and his opinion, not factual.
71.116.241.196 21:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I removed the two Indymedia links because the pictures in both those links WERE NOT of Save Our State members. Same thing with that "anti=immigration" link. If you are going to post links that are supposedly of SOS, please make sure they are correct!! Thank you very much. Happy Bunny 15:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
see SOS in action at Laguna Beach, July 2005
Why are these links being deleted? - Will Beback 00:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)Because those links show pictures of people that are supposed to be SaveOurState members who ARE NOT. The links do not apply. Are you interested in facts or just biased opinions?
Here are some more links from reputable news sources and within past 6 months:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/politics/cal/la-me-profile27jun27,0,1890555.story?coll=la-news-politics-california (Joe Turner and SOS)
http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/politics/13378623.htm (Turner Arrested for shoving someone)
Article on Jesse Diaz, Cofounder of La Tierra es de Todos
http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_D_diaz16.1d633b18.html
Elzia
10:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
Those were photos taken at SOS demonstrations. 08:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Please see http://www.soychicano.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=811
for more on SOS as a hate group
(UTC)
_____________________________________________
This "article" is completely biased and racist and needs to be deleted! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.201.252 ( talk • contribs)
The first edits that were made that are being called "vandalism" were factual and from the perspective of someone that has observed Save Our State's racist behaviours on over 10 occasions. They were then immediately deleted by Save Our State members. The article is severely slanted even if the language has been modified. Any site that refers to Save Our State as a "civil rights" organization is bizarre.
Elzia
18:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Just the facts please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs) .
This really is garbage although I will leave it in. I quote:
After SOS announced their intention to return to Baldwin Park, notice was placed on the Stormfront website, an "online white nationalist community" headed by former klansman
BIG DEAL
Does the Indymedia entry in WIkipedia state
After IMC was established, terrorist cells in Iran scanned for information on Israeli sympathizers.
Or does the wiki article on Peace Movement Groups say
"RCP members- Maoists - regularly attend ..."
Get the picture?
It is REDBAITING in Reverse.
I was warned that this site was unfair and not open to true factual articles, instead preferring leftist diatribe. I see those warnings were correct.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs)
I Have nothing further to say. I find this entire situation unacceptable and wikipedia is absolutely not interested in the truth. I really could care less what you do with this article and all the inappropriate links. No one who matters reads this site anyway. Hasta lavista baby. I won't be back.
I am so glad I didn't donate any $$ because wiki isn't worth one red cent.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs)
The SOS group is an online political action group, so, they're going to hide any information that's unflattering to SOS. The SOS are not the nazi groups, but, nazis have shown up at nearly all the SOS-organized demonstrations. Some of the earlier SOS demonstrations became focal points for people on stormfront.org, who decided to piggyback their own organizing efforts (as National Vanguard) onto the SOS event. At the second Baldwin Park demonstration, prior to the demo, the fascists had a picnic gathering at a nearby park.
At all times, the SOS leadership have said "we can't control who comes to our demonstrations." I think this is veiled language that indicates that they are content to have fascists support the SOS demonstrations. From the posts on the SOS bulletin board, it is clear that some individuals in SOS are sympathetic to the fascists.
I have attended the last 3 SOS protests and there have been no "Nazi's." The people who make such claims are anarchists, communists, and violent socialists. I have videotapedracist organizations counter-protesting SOS such as the Mexica-Movement and Mecha. The "race card" is played against SOS as an attempt to draw in controversy and smear those who oppose illegal immigration. The people who make such claims are most often racist. - TheWatchdog
Race Hatred, White Nationalism, and the Struggle for Aztlan
from
http://www.soychicano.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=811
"AMERICANS ARE TIRED OF FEELING LIKE A FOREIGNER IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY." [sic] – Joe Turner, "leader," Save Our State
1) SOS is no less a Civil Rights organization than is the SPLC. In this case, SOS advocates for the civil rights of those legally present in the United States.
2) That Prop. 187 was "struck down" is not the entire story. The administration of Gray Davis abandoned the legislation: He did not appeal the ruling, which was the demise of 187.
3) The links provided, calling a radical, wingnut separatist/racialist outfit an "anti-racist" group are absurd.
This article is truly an unfortunate example of the leftist slant that taints wikipedia scholarship. Zuzim 14:24, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Zuzim 13:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
How does a group that spends its time protesting historical and cultural monuments along with spanish billboards, fall under the title anti-illegal immigrant or pro-secure borders? It also can't be called a civil rights organization because it does not look like SOS is trying to protect anyone's rights when they hang around with aryan supremacy organizations. So why not strip any and all of these "titles," when they don't have citations, from the article once it becomes unlocked? They don't have to be called a nativist group or anything of the sort but neither should they be grouped in with genuine secure borders or immigration reform groups. Mosquito-001 17:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I think the Watchdog's links should definitely remain because they have footage from actual SOS events. And unfortunately, some of the most complete articles on SOS protests are on Indymedia (which is obviously not the best news source since anyone can publish there. But maybe we can use some?) And I really object to people drawing me into this debate personally. I have never wanted anything but a good article here. That said, I have a SOS article in the personal sandbox User:Rockero/Save Our State. I'm going to add to it a bit more as soon as I get home from the swapmeet, and then I'd like all interested parties (from ALL SIDES) to take a look.-- Rockero 18:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Please delete this article, because what you have up now is an inacurrate article with several external links that have nothing to do with Save Our State. You people would have done great doing propaganda for Nazi Germany.
Hello? I am commenting on this article.
I didn't think it was possible but the other article has less to do with what SOS is about that this article. You guys just keep topping yourselves when it comes to bias bullcrap articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.241.196 ( talk • contribs)
Article unprotected. Happy editing. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @
"Viva Zarqawi the Gringo Killer" is AT LEAST as relevant as the absurd "White Nationalist" connection.
The truth about the bitterly racist, Reconquista movement seeking special rights for foreign nationals living in California goes directly to the issue of the environment in which SOS operates. The hatred the majority of this lot feel for whites and for America is central to understanding SOS.
This hideously slanted article tars SOS with guilt-by-association with "white supremacists," in spite of everything Joe Turner and others have done specifically to disavow and discourage these relationships. Also, a patronising and frankly racist portrait is painted of SOS trying to involve African Americans in the movement.
On the other hand, critical information about the opposition is suppressed -- in an obvious attempt to tilt the article even further -- so that it appears that SOS are a bunch of crackpots. The truth is that the rabid race hate projected by the opposition justifies SOS's means and ends. Wheatabix 06:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
The second event at the monument is refered to as BPII. Please see the SOS page http://www.saveourstate.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=2255&hl=balwin%20park%20II&st=80 This title was also used on indymedia but unfortunately the links may no longer exist or are inaccessible at the moment. The article also does not mention the Garden Grove Protest. The event was not officially held by the SOS, members were in the audience (old preach). During this event a driver allegedly ran over members of the pro-immigration group.
digitalronin 01:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Their members are content spouting 9-11 conspiracy theories instead of being involved with politics on any level. I was just banned from their forums for poking fun at their conspiracy theories, by one big tinfoil hat moderator.
A super-majority of their forum trollers also deny that Democrats in both houses of Congress almost unanimously voted against border enforcement, unanimously voted for amnesty, and have a voting record that goes decades back which mirrors this same open borders pattern. SOS members are content to just bash Bush 24/7. I think allot of them are Democrats In Denial, so they create conspiracy theories in an attempt to grab a hold of the many paradoxes that jumble around in their brains. The SOS guys are going nowhere fast, and they are completely harmless. If you are an open borders freak, I wouldn't worry about them. The worse thing you can do to them, if you wish to retaliate with all your hatred you can muster, is to ignore them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wuggsy ( talk • contribs)
Check it out. SOS members are conspiring to harass a human rights activist by mocking his dead son, who died on the battlefield in Iraq. http://www.saveourstate.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=17054
I have removed a section that was insifficiently sourced under WP:RS. Blogs are not acceptable sources to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The second section sourced by the blog should also be removed unless the youtube citation provided can independently confirm the info. I will be looking into it. Happy editing, TheKaplan 00:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Wasn't the "insufficiently-sourced blog" SaveOurState's own message board?
In regards to YouTube, the user gent2222/AmericanPatriot77 (his latest incarnation is JumpAroundWeird), had all his 400+ videos removed. He, a guy named Dennis, was the videographer for SOS. He/SOS has moved their videos to http://americanpatriot77.com/forums and those videos include the ones banned by YouTube.
For instance, one video is even called "Video of the day laborer that I chased and got his ass arrested!! LOL." The SOS members also include Minuteman members, as they admit in the videos. MM's SOP clearly states that they are not to engage in dialogue or otherwise confront illegal aliens. >:) 68.33.185.185 17:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Lets not prevaricate folks.
I just edited out some comments from this article. The reason I did that is someone added comments that were supposedly mine, when in fact they were NOT comments from me.
I would appreciate it if whoever keeps writing false things that I supposedly said would knock it off. I am the one who left SOS and I know what I said when I left. I have edited the comments to reflect the reality of the situation. I am no longer affiliated with SOS but I wish them well. They are not racists. There maybe are a couple of misguided folks there but for the most part they are sincere Americans whose number one concern is the damage being done to our country by the glut of illegal aliens invading the USA.
So if you are going to edit this article please stick to the facts and the truth.
Thanks, Sandy B.
This section was 100% Original Research. BulldogPete 00:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Some of the sources used in the article fail short. See WP:V and WP:RS. For example, forum postings are not considered reliable sources for Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 18:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I am one of the current officers of Save Our State in Northern CA, Davi Rodrigues, AKA AyatollahGondola, and can provide source quotes for the organization. Rather than dispute the various information here on my own incentive, I can offer the following:
The current web address we are using is http://SaveOurState.info/ Joseph Turner has not been involved in the management since 2009. That I know of, Joseph Turner was never married. Chelene Nightingale was denied any further management role within SOS as of 2009. Save Our State is still active with street level protests, and has been through 2009, 2010, and 2011, in Santa Clarita, Los Angeles, and Sacramento. Save Our State is strategically planning further activities for 2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.11.56 ( talk) 04:28, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Image:SOS-logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I believe this reference is incorrect, and that Turner is unmarried. HedgeFundBob ( talk) 13:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
Someone just deleted my edit that was sourced from the Southern Poverty Law Center with the rationale "sorry no blogs", even though the source was not a blog but the SPLC talking out the SOS blogs. This poster also deleted a link to a news article regarding SOS activities in Ojai, California, with no rationale given. I strongly disagree with this kind of editing unless this poster is willing to provide *very* specific links to the Wikipedia policies in question, as none of the sources quoted in my edit were from blogs, and my understanding is that it's okay to source something from an accredited article that talks about blogs. And I'm not aware of any policy that prevents linking to local news coverage. 76.203.149.212 ( talk) 14:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Old text:
I've removed this for a number of reasons. "Was threatened" is a vast mischaracterization of what the reporter said in the first story. If anything, it should say that an adult supporter of SOS wielded pepper spray in self defense over a perceived threat; neither party is reported as directly threatening the other. The second reference is an opinion piece and makes no mention of SOS. Finally, what is really added to the article by mentioning that a member drew pepper spray in self defense at a rally? — C.Fred ( talk) 12:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I was there that day and that's not what happened. The SOS people lied in the street, threatened people with no provocation, and generally acted like thugs and domestic terrorists. Sorry to burst your bubble. 76.175.151.187 ( talk) 13:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:16, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 00:29, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Save Our State. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)