Talk:James Keegstra

Biography assessment rating comment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. --KenWalker | Talk 02:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

denial

I do not see anything in this article that indicates the category 'Holocaust denial' or 'Holocaust denier' is appropriate. Can someone help here? Hmains 00:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• "In 1984, Keegstra was stripped of his teaching certificate and charged under the Criminal Code of Canada with "wilfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group" by teaching his social studies students that the Holocaust was a fraud and that Jews are "treacherous, evil and responsible for depressions, anarchy and war."" -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 00:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

thanks Hmains 20:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Calling something a fraud doesn't dispute that it exists. Just that there is a problem. And well, he got the performatory evidence for the rest of his statements, even if that was for a price. 105.4.6.239 (talk) 15:00, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Was his first conviction declared declared unconstitutional, then he was retried? The Canadian court seemed to have trouble dancing around some of their other decisions on free speech. His problem - unstated - appears to be his use of his teacher's position as a bully pulpit to indoctrinate trapped students. Of course if he trapped his students by grading according to their belief in the holocaust, he would probably be the principal long ago.159.105.80.141 17:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

One of the links - Echoes of Auschwitz - make it clear that indoctrinating kids is okay i Canada - just be careful which way.159.105.80.141 17:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Appeal

I thought Keegstra appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal and the Crown appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.222.73 (talk) 20:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

RfC

BAn 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 16:49, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Death

James Keegstra died on June 12th 2014, age 80.

http://www.reddeeradvocate.com/news/Holocaust_denier_dies_at_age_80_262963741.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.69.136.179 (talk) 10:56, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Article expansion

Hi @User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, thank you for your rich expansion of the article's contents. I have read through it and made a few minor edits. I did notice that much of the content isn't followed either by references or reference tags. I trust that all the content you have added is supported by the available references, but I do think each paragraph, at least, should be followed by a reference tag. Could you take a look at that when you get a chance? Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:49, 21 July 2023 (UTC) @User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, please direct your attention to this matter when you get a chance. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:25, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I worked on that article a lot the other day. There were glaring errors of fact and law in it when I came across it. I worked through most of it to do my best to fix them, including adding references to relevant sources that were not cited, and fixing some serious misdescriptions of the legal process. I broke off around 10 pm my time, knowing that there were still some major errors that needed to be fixed, that I just hadn't had time to do, and references still to be added.

When I woke up in the morning, there was this message, posted less than an hour after I went to bed, nagging me to get back to work. From a self-appointed Boss-Editor, who took it on themselves to start directing the work on the article.

To my mind, Assume Good Faith means that you assume other editors know what they're doing, and will continue doing what they can to improve an article. That's especially the case when that editor has been adding references to the article already, that very day.

Assume Good Faith also means that you can assume that other editors have things to do In Real Life, like eat and sleep, and can't be on the Wikipedia all the time.

Boss-Editor instead assumed that I needed to be told what to do, and that I needed to be told that late at night, so I'd get out of bed and keep working. As far as I can tell from their user page, Boss-Editor is in the same time zone as me.

You know what? I'm a volunteer, just like everyone else on the Wikipedia. I work on the articles that interest me, and work with people I enjoy collaborating with. I no longer enjoy working on this article. I won't be working on it any more. I will take it off my watch list.

There are still some significant errors in the article that need to be fixed, plus an ambiguity that Boss-Editor introduced in their edits. That's no longer my concern. Boss-Editor can find someone else to boss around. I'm done.

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

@User:Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, I'm not sure what your problem is, but you just spent several precious minutes being condescending and berating me, all because I asked you to add references to content you created. I took the pains to thank you and praise your work, only to be greeted with a sarcastic and mean-spirited response. I sure hope you're easier to work with in person. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 16:31, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

"self-appointed Boss-Editor" is not very AGF though, is it? Revirvlkodlaku pinged you once with a polite question, then once again more than 48h later. Sources are important. Oh well, happy editing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:32, 23 July 2023 (UTC)