Q3: The article's sources have a left-wing bias, or are otherwise unreliable. If Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral, shouldn't the sources used in the article be more balanced?
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject YouTube, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of YouTube and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YouTubeWikipedia:WikiProject YouTubeTemplate:WikiProject YouTubeYouTube articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Podcasting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of notable podcasts and podcast-related information on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PodcastingWikipedia:WikiProject PodcastingTemplate:WikiProject Podcastingpodcasting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.
The sentence saying “The FBI began an investigation as to whether any of this money went toward the financing of illegal acts, such as the storming of the U.S. Capitol,” should be changed. Fuentes himself never did anything illegal and never went into the capital. He has stated that he told others to not go in as well. Fuentes was not charged or prosecuted for anything that happened on January 6th.
Similarly, the sentence “ Although he did not enter the building, he allegedly shouted encouragement for the rioters to "keep moving towards the Capitol" and that they were "taking the Capitol back,” should be changed. There is no proof he said this, the ADl is merely speculating. Fuentes himself has claimed he did not tell others to go in. Fuentes has also never spread misinformation about Covid, everything he has concretely claimed has been proven correct. 45.23.111.209 (talk) 13:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 April 2024[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Under political views > Catholic integralism and Christian nationalism, in the second paragraph, change “Fuentes has described himself is a reactionary who supports” to “Fuentes has described himself as a reactionary who supports” Smurr7 (talk) 06:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @GorillaWarfare: I reverted revert because you removed good content due to your own biases (which is evident in your professional history). I added facts - reinstatement on X (formerly known as Twitter) and also added a more neutral introduction, while still giving space to the criticism. As I reverted, I added notes as I was able. --domesticenginerd 15:39, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You reverted far more than the single edit you've identified (and as Muboshgu has pointed out, you inappropriately used rollback to do so). Can you clarify whether your concern is specifically with this revert or with the three other edits I made? And can you please elaborate on this "your own biases (which is evident in your professional history)" comment? Thanks, GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) No, you are watering down sourced content, and now making value judgments on contributors rather than sticking to content. You should stop edit warring right now and only make changes with consensus to do so. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am requesting that the image shown for Nick Fuentes be changed. It is currently a low quality screenshot. There is an image photographed by Nicole Hester of Fuentes at a rally, which seems to me as a better image to portray the subject.
Done – thanks for your suggestion. Zenomonoz (talk) 03:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted the edit due to the image in question being ripped straight from the article it sourced, which does not license the image under Public Domain. @Heatyeet, I recommend you look into WP:IUP and image licensing guidelines before uploading images to the project. @Zenomonoz, I understand that you were just trying to fulfill the request but please make sure to double-check images submitted in edit requests to ensure whether they fit copyright guidelines or not. Thanks, B3251 (talk) 11:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry I would never have approved that change had I checked. Thanks. Zenomonoz (talk) 12:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What can I do to get the image licensed properly? Heatyeet (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Get the owner of the license to agree to release it to the public domain. If it's a photo from a major agency like Getty or AP, that won't happen. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The photo is by an independent photographer by the name of Nicole Hester. How can I get her to release it? Heatyeet (talk) 17:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reach out to her directly to request that she release it via creative commons. If she agrees, great. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Heatyeet Chances are, you are not going to be able to get agency or independent photographers to freely license the images they take for journalists. I recommend looking at this page for general licensing guidelines for Wikimedia Commons. B3251 (talk) 01:22, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 May 2024[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done: I assume you are asking for this template, which you created, to be added.
Right now, Fuentes, Trump, and William Dudley Pelley are the only articles specific to this template. That isn't enough to bother with for a "series". Neither Pelley nor Trump's article specifically describes either man as a "Christian nationalist", which raises WP:UNDUE and WP:OR issues. It's also odd to imply that these three people are comparable in significance, since Pelley was obscure and politically impotent. Adding the template would be premature, to put it mildly. Grayfell (talk) 23:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the lead it says Nick is Islamophobic. I don't think Nick Fuentes is Islamophobic. And I checked, none of the sources say that. Also I find it weird how later in this article it says Nick praised religious and political aspects of the Taliban when they're an islamist government. And isn't Nick friends with Muslim Internet personality Sneako? and I think I saw a Nick clip on Twitter where Nick defended Islam or something. I think islamophobic should be removed. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 06:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's Nick going on another ant-semetic rant defending Muslims. https://x.com/goyabeangroyper/status/1747075246488744329?t=ssqambJtSX_0lFPzEjjNqg&s=09 HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 07:05, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think Nick is bad, but since I recently saw on twitter clips of him defending Islam and Muslims, I think "islamophobic" should be removed from the lead. Not because I like Nick, but because I think wikipedia shouldn't be misleading. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 07:09, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia mainly summarizes reliable, independent sources. Here is one source which explains this:
Per that source: "Islamophobia has been weaponized by white nationalists like Fuentes for recruitment and propaganda, making his support for the Taliban's militant Islamist worldview all the more intriguing."
Avoid cherry-picking from primary sources. His occasional willingness to defend some Muslims, in some situations, proves nothing at all. Grayfell (talk) 18:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It says "Islamophobia has been weaponized by white nationalists like Fuentes". It doesn't say "by fuentes", it says "white nationalists like Fuentes." So the source is saying white nationlist like him are islamophobic, but it doesn't say fuentes directly. Is there a source in this article that says Nick attacked Muslims, insulted them, etc. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 20:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grayfell also since you even admitted he defends Muslims, if there's no sources that directly say he's islamophobic, I think it's reasonable to remove Islamophobic or only keep it in the infobox. I haven't really seen any clips of him targeting Muslims, if he is islamophobic, that shouldn't be in the lead because it's not that significant since 99% of the time he says positive things about Muslims, from at least the clips I've seen on Twitter/X HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 22:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The clips you have seen are not reliable sources, and for you to select an arbitrary sample of clips, based on your own personally viewing habits, is original research. His willingness to exploit the Israel–Hamas war for attention is as unsurprising as it is transparent, and reliable sources are unlikely to fall for it. Grayfell (talk) 00:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is English your primary language? "Islamophobia has been weaponized by white nationalists like Fuentes" is stating that white nationalists are weaponizing Islamophobia, and states very plainly that Fuentes is an example of a white nationalist that does this. This is not a difficult sentence to parse. Zaathras (talk) 00:13, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zaathras it says "Islamophobia has been weaponized by white nationalists like Fuentes". It says White nationalists like him, but it doesnt say him specifically. When it says "white nationalists like him", they're talking about other white nationslists who are racist and anti-semetic but it doesn't say him specificall. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 00:41, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Grayfell I didn't do original research. The clips popped up on my twitter feed without me searching for them. Also how do you know he's exploiting the Israel-Hamas war? He probably is, but how do you know that? Is it because you're also doing origami research? HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 00:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
original (sorry I didn't mean to say "origami research" lol) HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 00:45, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since There's no sources that say "Nick Fuentes is islamophobic", and since this article says "he praised the Taliban" which is an Islamist group. And since in one source linked in this article which is this https://m.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-750425, that says Nick and sneako (a popular Muslim YouTuber) did a show together. And since Nick said on Twitter "He loved Muslims", even though that's not a reliable source, that should be more convincing that yeah this is a little misleading when this article says he's islamophobic. A source saying "White nationalists like Fuentes is weaponizing islamophobia" isn't say Nick is, it's saying other white nationlists like him are. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 01:06, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, your comments are original research, and yes, the source is talking about Fuentes specifically.
What twitter chooses to recommend you is still arbitrary and selective. Twitter is not a reliable source on Wikipedia, but it's also not a credible source of information in general. Grayfell (talk) 01:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you're saying i have to have a reliable source to remove Islamophobia, that says Nick loves or praises Muslims? For you shouldn't there also be a reliable source that says Nick Hates Muslims. I still can't find that source. All I see is "White nationlists similar to Nick weaponize islamophobia" but there's still no sources that calls him islamophobic specifically. I might end this conversation here because I hate Nick and he's anti-semitic. The only reason I cared was because I don't think articles should be misleading, but maybe it's not. You know best since you've been on this website longer than me. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 01:27, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your but it doesnt say him specifically is a false statement. Whether your are deliberately making a false statement or it is false out of a lack of understanding of the subject matter is academic. We will not be altering text in this article based on your incorrect analysis. Zaathras (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How is my statement false? It says "White nationlists like Fuentes weaponize islamophobia". It doesn't say Nick does, it says white nationalists like him do. "White nationlists like Fuentes weaponize islamophobia" not "Fuentes weaponizes islamophobia". It says white nationlists like him, but it doesn't say him specifically. What's false? In the source it's talking about other white nationlists similar to Nick with racist and anti-semetic views who weaponizes islamophobia. Bro, I have no idea how you interpreted my message as false. HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 02:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said I'm going to end the conversation because it's extremely pointless. I hate arguing with people. @Zaathras Btw I clicked on your account and saw that you're a fellow Jew :) sorry for frustrating you guys. Have a great day HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 02:38, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nicholas Fuentes is described as a neo-Nazi by a preponderance of reliable sources.[edit]
The introduction should classify Nick Fuentes as alt-right and neo-Nazi.
Nick Fuentes, the 25-year-old leader of the America First “Groyper” movement, was banned from Twitter in 2021 for “repeated violations” of the rules. Fuentes attended the deadly 2017 neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, and was also at the Jan 6. 2021, Capitol attack, encouraging his supporters to take over the building.https://sg.news.yahoo.com/elon-musk-says-hell-reinstate-214735037.html
.svg){kind=small}
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:57, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Done – thanks for your suggestion. Zenomonoz (talk) 03:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
