# Talk:Matt Koehl

The article lists Rocky Suhayda as Koehl's successor.
Rocky Suhayda leads an organization called the American Nazi Party, which was never the name of an organization led by Matthias Koehl. 
Koehl had been a member of an "American Nazi Party" but by the time he became its leader in 1967, the name had been changed to National Socialist White People's Party, and Koehl later changed its name to New Order, which is still the group's name today.
The same error is present in the article about Rocky Suhayda.  Your Buddy Fred Lewis (talk) 06:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

MatthiasKhoelJr.jpg
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:06, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

I will add those later (but that may be in a bit, I am fairly busy). PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:07, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

I can also add a few sfns, since I added some of the sources in the first place and am mostly responsible for the original lack of them. Star Manatee (talk) 10:12, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
@Star Manatee You did it correctly when you added it, the only reason there was a harv error was because the cite template needs to have a separate first= and last= parameter for the sfn template to match with the cite template. Sorry for the delay, I always forget what I've promised to work on. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:23, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
No problem. I didn't catch the error originally, thank you for noticing it and fixing it. Later i'll get to work on adding sfns for some of the other books. I appreciate your great work helping with this article, which i'm also heavily working on. I plan to get it to GA, although that's far off currently. (our interests overlap a lot, looking at your profile) Star Manatee (talk) 10:29, 27 March 2025 (UTC)
I added all the sfns. I appreciate very much your work on this article :) all of the ones in the topic area really need it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:48, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
Thank you so much for adding the sfns. I like to think that I'm good at adding information but I'm not so good at sourcing, and don't quite understand sfns all that well. Your work is also commendable, and I agree this topic area needs more editing - Koehl's actual successor has a tiny stub, and i'll eventually start editing that page. Star Manatee (talk) 12:19, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
The one thing i do wish is that we had more images than just the one from before he even joined the ANP, but unfortunately every other image of him appears to be taken by the New Order, Associated Press, or an unknown party. Star Manatee (talk) 12:38, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, it does not look like him from when he was actually notable. Not great! But not much we can do. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:18, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Matt Koehl/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Star Manatee (talk · contribs) 10:28, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 09:08, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

Image review

File:Matthias Koehl & the American Nazi Party (cropped).jpg: an identifiable reliable source is needed at Commons. Borsoka (talk) 09:08, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
Is what I've done good? 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 13:46, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
It looks good for me. I would name the photographer (Charles Tasnadi) at Commons. Borsoka (talk) 08:29, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
 Done 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 15:53, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Source review

High-quality academic sources are cited.
List the cited sources in ABC order. Borsoka (talk) 09:08, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
Based on title or author surname? 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 15:55, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Surname. Borsoka (talk) 08:41, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
Sorry if I'm intruding (though I have worked on this article myself somewhat), but I added a link to the references so I alphabetized it as well. Now resolved. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:42, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
No problem by me, I planned to do it with the rest of the review and am glad to see it done. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 07:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
Reference 2 checked (and OK)
There, he played violin with the civic opera. Closely paraphrased.
...they worked on the campaign of John G. Crommelin Closely paraphrased.
Please make sure that all instances of closely paraphrasing are fixed. Ping me, if you think you have fixed all problematic sentences. Borsoka (talk) 12:09, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@Borsoka: There are not many ways to phrase these sentences, but I believe I have done pretty well. Are he played the violin alongside the civic opera and …1958;  they worked on John G. Crommelin's campaign different enough? 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 12:45, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
I think the text may still be too closely paraphrased—the same points could likely be conveyed in other words. But since this is not my area of expertise, @Diannaa: I would really appreciate your thoughts. Borsoka (talk) 11:05, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
These phrases are plain English with no creative expression, so they are okay to keep in my opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:07, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick answer. Borsoka (talk) 12:18, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Comments

...Matthias would rarely speak with him... Why future in the past?
 Done
...young elite guard... Elite?
I haven't checked the source right now, but I believe it is using the term to mean important. Would you just cut out the word?
Yes, I would cut it out. Borsoka (talk) 10:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
 Done 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 13:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
...where he worked as an encyclopedia salesman. He worked in a print shop before entering the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee to study journalism, where he played violin with the civic opera... Rephrase.
I've slightly rephrased, but if what I've done isn't enough, feel free to say.
There Rockwell spoke on his "Lincoln Plan" – he was to donate $10,000 to any black family that would relocate to Africa. I would delete the sentence.
 Done. Adds nothing, except "Nazis don't like black people", which is elaborated on in the Views section anyway.
During Patler's time in the Party, he hated Koehl for their disagreements on race. Why not past perfect? Was the hate unilateral?
 Done, I think? Added a "had" to make it past perfect. Were you thinking of something else?
Koehl was the one who sent Patler out of the party, at the request of Rockwell. Why did Rockwell request Koehl to expel Patler (Rockwell's ally according to the previous sentence) from the party?
This is in the source, which I'll check later.
The review closed before i could say but I’d like to note that this is  Done 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 13:33, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Introduce Tommasi, Rudel, Devi, Jordan with one or two words.
 Done. Not sure if my introduction for Tommasi is enough, so I'll check how the source defines him.
Defined Tommasi how the source does: a California-based party member.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Star Manatee (talk • contribs) 08:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
 Done 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 11:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Explain IRS.
Not sure how to explain, but I've changed it to the full name.
...the party "[didn't] know of anyone who [could] fill his shoes"... Whose shoes?
 Done
Borsoka (talk) 08:38, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

I've also removed the WUNS stuff from the infobox, since it's not sourced in the body. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 14:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
(Lead) Koehl reworked the organization to be more openly occult and religious, influenced by the Greek–French writer Savitri Devi, as he renamed the group the New Order. Rephrase.
I've rephrased it, but I'm not sure if it's done anything - is the sentence I have now better?
(Lead) ..., with Koehl revealing little personal information to members I am not sure I understand. Is this half-sentence linked to the previous half?
It's not. Would you cut it? I'm afraid of making the lead too small.
I still do not understand the relevance of the sentence. Borsoka (talk) 07:16, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Split into two sentences. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 07:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
(Lead) ... in 2014,... I would delete it. Borsoka (talk) 10:46, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
The whole sentence? I'm perfectly happy to do so I just want to make sure I'm interpreting correctly. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
Not the whole sentence. I think we do not need to repeat the year of death in the lead. Borsoka (talk) 07:16, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
 Done 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 07:56, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Gladly passing this interesting and thoroughly researched article. Thank you for your work.


### Matt Koehl
I've listed this article for peer review because I plan to bring it to FAC, and I aesthetically like having a review step in between GAN and FAC.
Thanks, 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

Hey Star Manatee, are you still interested in comments here, or can this be closed? You may also be interested in a FAC mentor since it looks like this would be your first time at FAC. Let me know! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:23, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
@TechnoSquirrel69 I am still interested in comments here, yes. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 16:25, 24 September 2025 (UTC)


#### Comments from Parakanyaa
My bad! Will try to get to this soon. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:08, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, I feel the lead is rather short. The lead shouldn't be as long as Rockwell's article, but I think there's enough material here for a maybe 3 paragraph lead? Or a longer one than now, anyway. I think more information on particularly how he was received in the neo-Nazi movement (the widespread dislike of him and how it basically killed the party and led to numerous schisms) could be emphazied more, as that with his esoteric Hitlerlist stuff is a big part of his legacy. Maybe more on his views and background too, like the groups he was in prior. Really I just think the lead is too short and doesn't give enough context to understand him.
All the sources are reliable though there are 1 or 2 that I think may be a problem at FAC. But I'll check those again in a bit to be sure, they might be fine.
Will come back and write more soon. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:12, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
Another thing
"Koehl was very concerned with finding a way to get more people to join the group, and so as a solution, formed the National Socialist Liberation Front, a group targeting high school and college-aged people to join the movement. This group more or less failed in attracting people to the organization, and his attempts failed to stop the party's splitting."
This is cited to Moore 1983. Every other source I am aware of suggests that the original NSLF was founded by Pierce and Tommasi, so I am curious what this is citing. It seems contradictory. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:28, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
After looking at this source, I believe he is simply wrong. He doesn't cite anything and it's a sort of side note. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:32, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
Even more confusingly, Sunshine says this: "Calling itself the “Student Activist Arm of the National Socialist Movement,” the NSLF was founded at the NSWPP conference in April 1969. The party triumvirate of Robert Lloyd, William Pierce, and Matthias Koehl all took part in setting it up." PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:08, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
Should I remove the line or edit it with a better source? I feel like it adds something to the biography but that's useless if it's just incorrect. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 08:54, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
I had to look into this claim for a while and I'd add the Sunshine source to that and say he helped to set it up, but it wasn't just him. It seems like he helped.
more comments soon, sorry PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:18, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
I’ve removed the sentence, as it don’t feel it Ada that much to Koehl’s biography. Might add it back with sunshine source, not that sure. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
I made the lead slightly longer. I think it's not perfect and definitely needs a bit more work but better than it was. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 07:44, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Might edit it for grammar in a bit, but a lot better. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:19, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Ok part 2. Sorry this took so long I got distracted.
Well-researched
All web/news sources are clearly reliable; I haven't heard of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights, but Zeskind is the author of an established book on the subject so even then he is an expersps.
Of the books used, most are high quality academic books or from reputable nonacademic publishers, and I see no issue with them. All are reliable, but Klan-Destine Relationships: A Black Man's Odyssey in the Ku Klux Klan seems more of a personal memoir. However Davis is a significant figure so his opinion seems due, and this is used to cite an opinion from Koehl. Hence, I think it is fine.
So, we are good here. I feel like, however, there may be sources we are not utilizing. And from that...
Comprehensiveness
So, how sure are you that this is a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature"? Koehl is given significant coverage in a lot of material on the far-right, and while I never did as much of a deep dive on the sourcing as I did with Rockwell, I suspect that there is quite a bit more to add to reach comprehensiveness. E.g., I recall there are more pieces from Kaplan that discuss him, and we only cite the 2000 encyclopedia. For example, Kaplan's chapter in Millennialism, Persecution, and Violence, his book Radical Religion in America, The post-war paths of occult national socialism: from Rockwell and Madole to Manson. And other journal articles I have that I marked as containing sigcov on Koehl that aren't here, like Dreaming of a National Socialist World: The World Union of National Socialists (wuns) and the Recurring Vision of Transnational Neo-Nazism, without having looked further I think we're missing a bit. I think a once over for more sources would be good.
I feel like the coverage of the schisms is there, but somewhat oddly framed. Also, he was known for his writings to some degree, and we only mention the names of these writings in the bibliography section, not the text, which I feel is an oversight. Faith of the Future especially should be mentioned in the text.
Another thing is his pre-ANP career is barely touched on, when IIRC sources do cover that quite a bit. I would try to cover more his involvement in those parties. These are just things that stick out to me.
Images
All the images are solid, no worries there. Probably some more could be added and the arrangement of the first one is a bit odd but no issues in terms of copyright. One minor criticism is that I don't think the multi image of Rockwell and Koehl is good, in that the quality of both images is a bit bad. Might be worth replacing with another image? I can look for some more. Also having two successive images aligned left looks bad to me.
Well-written
While the prose isn't bad and it definitely fulfills the GA standards for writing, I don't think it is quite up to the FA standards yet, though not terribly far off. It's a bit meandering, at times slightly non-neutral. Having someone copyedit it would be beneficial. For one example, I find the whoe "By the early 1980s, the organization..." paragraph to be phrased awkwardly.
Also, the section about Patler being after the assassination feels jarring to me. His conflicts with Patler should flow more naturally into the assassination section, rather than being stuck after, which forces you to recontextualize that information in a backwards way
Other
In terms of neutrality, close paraphrasing and stability and such it is good. Maybe a few quibbles about style guidelines but mostly fine. Not too long.
Generally good, but has a few thing to work on before it meets the FA standards. Sorry that some of my criticisms are broad, it's part of why this took me so long to write. Will write more later. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:45, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
Sorry that it’s taken me quite a while to remember! I’ll get to this, as well as the earlier suggestions I haven’t addressed yet. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
When I wrote it up initially I did quite a significant search for sources, but clearly there are several I have not used. I will check through and add from the sources you have mentioned and try to have more of a look over the sources I’ve already used for information on his writings and the period prior to joining the ANP.
I also don’t agree with having two successive images aligned left, I originally designed the page to go left right left right. I think this resulted from the removal of an image? I will change the images of Koehl and Rockwell, we have better images on the commons but I’m not sure if they’re from the year.
I will look for a copyedit and try to change some of the issues you addressed, like the location of the information about Patler. 🔮🛷 starmanatee 🛷🔮 (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2025 (UTC)