Talk:Nick Fuentes/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Nicholas Fuentes is described as a neo-Nazi by a preponderance of reliable sources.

The introduction should classify Nick Fuentes as alt-right and neo-Nazi.

Here are just a few sources to begin with:

• The presence of these extremists has been a persistent issue at CPAC, and in previous years conference organizers have ejected well-known Nazis and white supremacists such as Nick Fuentes. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nazis-mingle-openly-cpac-spreading-antisemitic-conspiracy-theories-fin-rcna140335
• 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
• In a move that will surprise few people, Elon Musk announced Thursday that far-right commentator Nick Fuentes, known for racist, neo-Nazi, and antisemitic views, will soon be allowed back on X. https://newrepublic.com/post/181234/elon-musk-nick-fuentes-hitler-twitter-x
• Elon Musk Wants To Bring Neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes Back to X https://uk.news.yahoo.com/elon-musk-wants-bring-neo-205800467.html
• Neo-Nazi Trump dinner guest Nick Fuentes laments Kanye’s antisemitism apology https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/nick-fuentes-kanye-trump-apology-b2470199.html
• Elon Musk Will Reinstate Neo-Nazi on Twitter https://lamag.com/internet/elon-musk-will-reinstate-neo-nazi-on-twitter

DocZach (talk) 16:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

I wasn't sure at first but this might be enough then yeah FMSky (talk) 16:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Which sources from the list do you recommend we use? I don't want to use too many for the same thing. DocZach (talk) 16:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Imo the NBC and independent one FMSky (talk) 16:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

IMO it should be changed from "has been described as a neo-Nazi by some sources" to "has been described as a neo-Nazi by various sources". There are still a lot more sources than those that call Fuentes this. Fruitful Frugal (talk) 02:21, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Dont know exactly how this makes any difference but I've changed it --FMSky (talk) 02:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Dinner with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago section

Do any experienced editors have suggestions on how this section could be condensed? Maybe a combination and trimming-down of, or complete removal of the 'Response from political leaders' and 'Response from the Jewish community' subsections? The article is about Nick Fuentes, not the dinner, so detailing every senator and organization's thoughts on it seems a bit excessive. Swinub (talk) 12:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

No input from anyone, so I removed the subsections mentioned above and left Pence and Netanyahu's reactions. Hopefully this is sufficient. Swinub (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Advocates for Genocide

In the lede, replace use of word "genocide" with "holy war"

−

and advocates for the genocide of Jews.

+

and advocated for "[[Religious war|holy war]]" against Jews

Cited source from the Jerusalem Post quotes him as saying "holy war" and never uses the term genocide. "Genocide" and "Holy War" are not synonymous. Squidroot2 (talk) 23:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done:. No consensus. Per the source: "Because we're willing to die in the holy war, we will make them die in the holy war. And they will go down." Fuentes is not only calling for a "holy war", he is saying that all Jews will die in a holy war, which is a grandiose and pretentious way of calling for genocide. Please do not reopen this template until consensus has been changed. Grayfell (talk) 00:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

(My understanding of WP:ER is that I am to open a new topic for consensus, not reply to original edit request. Apologies in advance if this is not correct)

We should not say in the lede that the Fuentes "advocates for the genocide of Jews". This is a strong accusation and needs to be supported by a Reliable Source. The cited source for this claim is a Jerusalem Post article that never uses the word genocide. Instead it quotes Fuentes as using the term "Holy War", which is a distinct concept from genocide. While genocide advocacy is a possible interpretation of his words, we cannot be making our own interpretations as Wikipedia editors, especially in the lede of a WP:BLP. This situation is explicitly called out in the second point of WP:BLPREMOVE: "Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that... is an original interpretation or analysis of a source"

The word "genocide" was previously removed but added back in this revision. While I agree with the editor that "spiritual holy war" is not appropriate (Fuentes seems to be describing a physical war with real violence; not Spiritual Warfare), I don't think we should editorialize in the other direction. As for the claim from the summary that Rolling Stone said he advocated for genocide: 1) There is only one citation for Rolling Stone in the current version of the article and it does NOT say this about Fuentes 2) Per WP:ROLLINGSTONEPOLITICS, Rolling Stone is not considered reliable for political topics. If included, we would need an attribution. Squidroot2 (talk) 01:23, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Fuentes is calling for a holy way in which Jews shall be murdered. That's literally genocide, my dude. Sourced and accurate. Zaathras (talk) 01:26, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

There is a distinction between holy wars like The Crusades and genocides like The Holocaust. We need a Reliable Source for the interpretation that he advocates for genocide otherwise it is WP:OR.

Even if you think I'm wrong and there is no distinction, then I'm not really arguing for any content change to the article. Why not just change it and be on the safe side of WP:BLPREMOVE? Squidroot2 (talk) 01:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Fuentes is not a history professor, he is not speaking of the capital-C crusades, he is calling for violence against Jews and Judaism, i.e. the "holy" part. Also, some rather curiously specific WP: policy shortcuts you seem to know of quite readily. Not what one would expect from a 2 yr-old account with sporadic edits. Zaathras (talk) 01:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Zaathras. I just try to make sure I understand the rules before making or suggesting edits.

As for your actual point, yes I agree that he is calling for violence against Jews. I would have no objection if the article said "advocates for violence against Jews". But it says "advocates for genocide of Jews" which is I think goes beyond a straightforward reading of the cited sources. Bin Laden advocated for violence in the form of what many would call a holy war, but I think there is a reason why you won't find "advocated for genocide" in the lede of his article.

And I would disagree about the plausibility of Fuentes referring to The Crusades. According to this article from Right Wing Watch he does seem to be fascinated with that era in history.

Could I understand why you feel the word "genocide" is the most appropriate word here? Clearly, it is not because of any Rolling Stone article like the edit summary that added it said. Squidroot2 (talk) 02:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

His dilettante interest in history is irrelevant. He is advocating for the death of all Jews. Wikipedia isn't a platform for euphemisms or PR, so over-simplifying this to just 'violence' is inappropriate. Grayfell (talk) 03:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

@Grayfell I'm certainly not interested in euphemisms or PR; my original suggestion was to use Fuentes' ugly words directly. My issue is that we have dozens of sources that are clearly not afraid to harshly critisise Fuentes' beliefs, but not a single one that says "Advocates for genocide of", "Advocates for killing all" "Calls for death of all", or "Calls for extermination of" and that includes the Jeruselem Post article. If someone can find one that does, great; I'll drop it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is interpreting sources in a BLP which we can't do. I don't understand what's wrong with "advocates for killing Jews", "advocates for war against Jews" or anything similar. Squidroot2 (talk) 04:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia. We summarize things in direct language. That's the point. Grayfell (talk) 04:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, and an accurate summary of our currently cited sources is that every single one of them stops short of calling him a genocide advocate.

I don't understand why the phrase "advocates for genocide" is so important to this article. I really thought this would be a simple, non-controversial change. We are replacing a phrase that, if I'm right, is a violation of the second point of WP:BLPREMOVE, with a phrase that, if you're right, is completely synonymous. The asymmetry of the arguments we are making alone would seem to justify making the quick change. Squidroot2 (talk) 10:38, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Genocide and holy war are not interchangeable, and holy war is certainly direct language. If that part of the lead said "and advocates for a holy war against Jews," would that really need to be summarized further? I don't believe there's any ambiguity there. Swinub (talk) 13:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

I removed "advocates for the genocide of" on BLP grounds. I agree 100% that the best interpretation of Fuentes' words is a call for genocide, but we need that interpretation to come from RS. I searched for a while for reliable sources describing his "holy war" comments as genocidal, but I found none. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Criticism of Donald Trump

He recently began to vehemently criticize Trump for his pro-immigrant and pro-Israel statements in X. Should we still classify him as a Trumpist or a Third Way supporter? 188.163.69.27 (talk) 00:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

We should classify him as WP:RS do. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Christianity should be in infobox

Just like on the page about Osama bin laden on the infobox it says his religion in Sunni Islam. It needs to say Christianity in the infobox on this article because fuentes known for Christian nationalism HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 17:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

bro it needs to be done or there shouldn't be an infobox at all HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 10:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 August 2024

Grammer change in the Personal life section.

Please remove "himself" from the opening sentence. It is not a generally accepted use of the reflexive in this form.

Please change it to "According to Fuentes, he is of Mexican descent via his paternal ancestors and is...."

Thank you. TheOriginalWikiWatcher (talk) 10:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done – Muboshgu (talk) 15:06, 12 August 2024 (UTC)