314:- I'm surprised to hear you say that you were encouraged to see that Molandfreak reverted my last edit, when you previously said that you "accept BLP violation assessment." If you accept that this is a BLP violation, you should not be happy that Molandfreak is trying to restore it. Unless you have changed your position since then, I think the only thing that you and I can't agree on is whether the section should be named "People" instead of "Proponents of Hate." And that's not a discussion we've spent much time on, because you have not responded to the substance of my November 12, 2019 comment. I'd like to actually discuss this with you. That being said, you don't need my approval to request arbitration but arbitration is inappropriate for this situation as per
81:
22:
193:) reverted this paragraph and wanted some discussion on it. I removed it again because, as BLP requires, unsourced contentious material about living persons should be removed without the need for discussion. This material should stay removed unless there is consensus that it is not a BLP violation. Then again, I can't possibly see how branding a list of people as "proponents of hate" in a template, without sourcing, could be anything other than a serious BLP violation.
71:
53:
210:
they studied all the links on a particular topic. And so, to eliminate a very important part of the Hate in Canada template would, I believe, do a disservice to the reader. I accept your BLP violation assessment. However, I do feel the names belong somewhere in the template. Therefore, would you support a section simply called "People," which would include the group you removed as well as the two that remain?
235:- I'm not sure. I'm not necessarily opposed to it, but a category called "people" in a template about "hate in Canada" implies that these people are involving in spreading hate. Granted, it's not nearly as clear as a category called "proponents of hate" but it's still troublesome. I'm not sure how these names could be included in the template without casting aspersions on the individuals.
141:
356:. You're absolutely right. I did accept your argument about BLP. But quite frankly, when I read your statement, "I'm not sure", it did not seem like an invitation to discuss anything. It seemed like you were thinking about it and I was waiting for your conclusion. I'm not too good at debates, I'm afraid. That being said, I quote
209:
For me, one of the best parts of
Knowledge is the templates at the bottom of the page. When well thought out, they allow the user to get a quick, at-a-glance perspective of a broad topic. Indeed, sometimes these templates are so well done, it almost seems as if one might get a very good education if
364:
in his or her edit summary: "there's plenty of sources verifying this." The names are all linked to articles which clearly identify what side of the proverbial fence they sit on. Some are (or were) nationally famous for their stances. So to list them in the table under a collective header is
484:", but "hate" alone isn't a term of art that applies solely to far-right extremists, it's a general emotion that all people experience at some point, regardless of political beliefs. The template definitely needs a better focus or something like far-right politics or extremism.
276:
violations, however, in this case, the names included in the deletion are fully documented as being associated with the topic. Since we clearly cannot seem to come to agreement, I will be request, without objection (in current parlance), to request arbitration
406:- Well, in case any of my previous comments were unclear, I am inviting you to discuss the situation further. Although I'm now unclear as to what your position is. Do you now think that listing people under the heading "Proponents of Hate" complies with
584:
Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that "hate" is identically equal to "right-wing"; I was going by the current contents of the template. Would it be alright with you if I withdrew the move request and took the template to TfD instead? Cheers,
480:" seems like a bad general concept article to include in the template and "Hate in Canada" is a very vague and subjective concept. I understand the logic as the topic also includes concepts like "
455:
156:
420:
374:
328:
290:
244:
219:
203:
450:– The current template title makes its scope somewhat subjective. I am proposing "Far-right politics" because that is the title of the overall parent article (
608:
493:
594:
542:
519:
467:
560:
572:
629:
634:
170:
365:
appropriate and necessary for completeness, IMHO. As I said earlier, Knowledge is about education, so an 80% template is an 80% education.
416:
324:
240:
199:
639:
531:
manner -- this radical move request is evidence of that. Remove the "far-right" topics from this and devote it strictly to
436:
190:
548:
412:
351:
320:
259:
237:
195:
103:
446:
513:
272:
reverted your last edit but I was disappointed that you reversed it again. I understand your concern about
94:
58:
33:
589:
462:
565:
This rename proposal implicitly comes with it a discussion on what content is appropriate for it. --
147:
102:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
604:
441:
370:
286:
215:
184:
586:
459:
39:
556:
489:
8:
569:
539:
527:- This is a dumpster-fire of a template conflating multiple distinct topics in a POV and
600:
451:
401:
366:
309:
282:
230:
211:
180:
175:
On
September 5th, I removed the "proponents of hate" section as it presents an obvious
508:
359:
267:
552:
485:
551:
would be a better forum for a broader discussion on restructuring the template.
579:
566:
536:
623:
407:
273:
176:
86:
528:
315:
278:
532:
503:
481:
70:
52:
535:, and it might actually have some valid reason for existing. --
458:). I would also not object to "Right-wing extremism in Canada".
99:
140:
477:
98:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
76:
621:
501:per nom. "Hate" is too subjective a concept.
32:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
630:Template-Class Canada-related articles
622:
635:NA-importance Canada-related articles
447:Template:Far-right politics in Canada
92:This template is within the scope of
21:
19:
135:
15:
38:It is of interest to the following
13:
549:Knowledge:Templates for discussion
281:in this case. Please acknowledge.
151:
146:This template was considered for
14:
651:
139:
79:
69:
51:
20:
264:. I was encouraged to see that
1:
421:11:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
375:00:50, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
329:18:36, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
291:17:23, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
245:19:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
220:22:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
204:16:18, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
106:and see a list of open tasks.
640:All WikiProject Canada pages
456:Far-right politics in Canada
437:Requested move 22 April 2020
413:May His Shadow Fall Upon You
352:May His Shadow Fall Upon You
321:May His Shadow Fall Upon You
260:May His Shadow Fall Upon You
238:May His Shadow Fall Upon You
196:May His Shadow Fall Upon You
179:violation. On November 9th,
171:"Proponents of Hate" Section
112:Knowledge:WikiProject Canada
7:
115:Template:WikiProject Canada
10:
656:
609:22:24, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
595:16:34, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
573:01:33, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
561:00:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
543:21:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
520:17:55, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
494:15:16, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
468:13:39, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
64:
46:
442:Template:Hate in Canada
118:Canada-related articles
154:. The result of the
452:Far-right politics
95:WikiProject Canada
34:content assessment
168:
167:
134:
133:
130:
129:
126:
125:
647:
592:
583:
518:
465:
449:
419:
405:
363:
355:
327:
313:
271:
263:
243:
234:
202:
153:
143:
136:
120:
119:
116:
113:
110:
89:
84:
83:
82:
73:
66:
65:
55:
48:
47:
25:
24:
23:
16:
655:
654:
650:
649:
648:
646:
645:
644:
620:
619:
590:
577:
502:
463:
445:
439:
411:
399:
357:
349:
319:
307:
265:
257:
236:
228:
194:
173:
117:
114:
111:
108:
107:
85:
80:
78:
12:
11:
5:
653:
643:
642:
637:
632:
618:
617:
616:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
563:
522:
496:
454:; there is no
438:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
430:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
423:
386:
385:
384:
383:
382:
381:
380:
379:
378:
377:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
298:
297:
296:
295:
294:
293:
250:
249:
248:
247:
223:
222:
172:
169:
166:
165:
144:
132:
131:
128:
127:
124:
123:
121:
104:the discussion
91:
90:
74:
62:
61:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
652:
641:
638:
636:
633:
631:
628:
627:
625:
610:
606:
602:
601:Verne Equinox
598:
597:
596:
593:
588:
581:
576:
575:
574:
571:
568:
564:
562:
558:
554:
550:
546:
545:
544:
541:
538:
534:
530:
526:
523:
521:
517:
516:
512:
511:
507:
506:
500:
497:
495:
491:
487:
483:
479:
475:
472:
471:
470:
469:
466:
461:
457:
453:
448:
443:
422:
418:
414:
409:
403:
402:Verne Equinox
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
376:
372:
368:
367:Verne Equinox
361:
353:
348:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
341:
340:
339:
330:
326:
322:
317:
311:
310:Verne Equinox
306:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
300:
299:
292:
288:
284:
283:Verne Equinox
280:
275:
269:
261:
256:
255:
254:
253:
252:
251:
246:
242:
239:
232:
231:Verne Equinox
227:
226:
225:
224:
221:
217:
213:
212:Verne Equinox
208:
207:
206:
205:
201:
197:
192:
189:
186:
182:
181:Verne Equinox
178:
163:
159:
158:
149:
145:
142:
138:
137:
122:
105:
101:
97:
96:
88:
87:Canada portal
77:
75:
72:
68:
67:
63:
60:
57:
54:
50:
49:
45:
41:
35:
31:
27:
18:
17:
524:
514:
509:
504:
498:
473:
440:
187:
174:
162:no consensus
161:
155:
93:
40:WikiProjects
29:
533:hate crimes
360:Molandfreak
268:Molandfreak
624:Categories
553:Rreagan007
486:Rreagan007
482:hate crime
157:discussion
152:2020 May 4
580:Netoholic
567:Netoholic
537:Netoholic
547:Permaps
191:contribs
148:deletion
30:template
499:Support
474:Support
599:Sure.
525:Oppose
408:WP:BLP
274:WP:BLP
177:WP:BLP
109:Canada
100:Canada
59:Canada
36:scale.
529:WP:OR
316:WP:AP
279:WP:AP
160:was "
28:This
605:talk
557:talk
510:uidh
490:talk
478:Hate
371:talk
287:talk
216:talk
185:talk
587:gnu
476:. "
460:gnu
150:on
626::
607:)
591:57
559:)
492:)
464:57
444:→
417:📧
415:●
410:?
373:)
325:📧
323:●
318:.
289:)
241:📧
218:)
200:📧
198:●
164:".
603:(
582::
578:@
570:@
555:(
540:@
515:e
505:b
488:(
404::
400:@
369:(
362::
358:@
354::
350:@
312::
308:@
285:(
270::
266:@
262::
258:@
233::
229:@
214:(
188:·
183:(
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
