Talk:Volksfront

message: Much of the material in this article reads like it's come off the group's own website, though I've been unable to find a copyvio.  I've just removed material like  because it was vague, failed NPOV, and I couldn't quite figure out what it meant.  This article needs references for each statement it makes, and we should not just state the group's ideas without references.  If we do state something, it should be concrete, not vague like "community building;" what does that mean? As with other groups, this article should not be used as a soapbox for the group.  I'm going to keep working on this article and probably removing stuff I see as problematic.  We can discuss here if there's any problem.  delldot talk 17:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And what is "a closed membership cultural association"? This is the kind of vague stuff I'm talking about: does it mean something objective, or is it just fluff from the group's own literature?  I recommend that we explain it clearly or remove it.  delldot talk 17:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup, NPOV needed 

message: I've decided to remove all the unsourced history information because it's vague and sounds like it comes from the group's own literature.  Anything that is referenced in a reliable source can be added back in.  Let me know if there are any issues with this.  delldot talk 17:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal 

message: several ages are given. Are these current ages? or ages when the events ocured ?J8079s (talk) 17:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ages ? 

message: I don't think a non POV article can be written for this Organization.  For instance all sources listed are from watchdog/lobby/groups that's stated purpose is to COMBAT groups like Volksfront.  These sources aren't very reliable, and much of the information they print is just hear say and gossip they have uncovered on the internet or from jaded former members.  How good of a source is this really?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dosgringo (talk • contribs) 06:02, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased Sources 

message: The page has been repeatedly vandalized with the insertion of bias and partisan reference sources, unsourced material and "buzz words".  Using the SPLC and ADL as source material would be similar to allowing the oil industry define environmentalists or Fox news to define democrats.  Legal documents, proven members interviews, the group's publicly stated positions or material from some other neutral source should be the criteria.
Also listing crimes that were never attributed to Volksfront as an organization in a court of law by "alleged" members is simply throwing enough stuff against the wall hoping some of it sticks.  Adam Lanza was "allegedly" a democrat, do we list the crimes of alleged followers of political views or movements in all pages of political organizations.  Bill Ayers is a Democratic Party activist, allegedly, is he listed in the Democratic Party page?
Attempting to redefine a non-existent organization is some attempt to recreate the facts on the ground for whatever unknown purpose.  The recent edits read like an advertisement for the SPLC, ADL and Anti-Fascists.  They do not live up to the "who, what, when, where, why" test.
One or two reference from the ADL or SPLC would show an opposing view, 2 dozen SPLC, ADL and Anti-Fascist source references shows a bias.
I will edit again, leaving one reference from the SPLC, ADL and Anti-Fascists, but deleting the rest, which is a fair compromise to allow some opposing view point.
Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by SMWIA (talk • contribs) 14:07, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The material you just removed (with an inaccurate edit summary) was about the founder. Its normal to mention the founder in an organisation's article. Ayers and Lanz did not found the Democrats and were probably not active in the Democrats.  -- haminoon (talk) 10:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Volksfront denying allegations is not reliable either. Many Volksfront members had criminal records before joining. Randal Lee Krager admitted spending time in prison. Besides actions speak louder than words. Every time a Volksfront member was on the news for a crime, Volksfront would cop out on them. That's not true brotherhood! You claimed that the sources are unreliable because they come from Jewish people? Volksfront is recognized as a gang by local authorities. If they were so peaceful then why did they disbanded? Why did they attracted the attention of the local authorities? Stop removing content. I'll fix the new section, but you got to stop. "Your skin color pisses me off, but I intend to get over it." - Brandon Vespermann "Didn't like my high school so I decided to blow it up" - Randal Krager " "I like the hatred that most white nationalist viewed towards minorities, to the hatred of a cancer patient has towards his cancer cells." - Corey J. Miller "Volksfront is a hateful origination, they believed that the Government is being run by Zionist" - anonymous 'former' member
 can you please review this dispute. Many users have reverted SMWIA (talk). ----BlueRedPurpleGreen (talk) 17:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

text: SMWIA, you have removed a lot of material for being "biased" but I can't see what is biased it about it. I assume you aren't disputing it was factual. It doesn't appear to be worded in a biased way. Would you care to explain why each sentence should be removed? -- haminoon (talk) 10:58, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

text: "Police claimed that his crime was not racially motivated, but a judge said that the evidence of Krager being a skinhead, and having a swastika tattoo was enough to convicted him of a hate crime.[8][9][7]" Are you blind? It clearly says that police claimed that his crime was NOT racially motivated! If you have a problem with the Krager section, then talk to  who reedit the paragraph.  ----BlueRedPurpleGreen (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What seems to be the problem here? I don't see anything bias on this article. As a German person, I like for this groups to be expose for what they really are becuase they give my people a bad name, but I also don't like anyting bias to be on the wikipedia artilces. Krager has a huge criminal history, so how is it bias to add what he did to this article? I already removed some bias inputs, but the rest seem valid. Please explain yourself with a neutral stand. Not all sources come from ADL and the SPLC. BerlinKid22 (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is much of your material is non-factual and is based on non-neutral sources.  7 of 13 references are from self-avowed anti-racist, civil rights or far left sources, which is over half.  The view point of anti-racist/anti-fascist organizations are well, if not over, represented.  I am leaving those references but deleting your additional content.  Berlinkid22, in your statement "As a German person, I like for this groups to be expose for what they really are becuase they give my people a bad name" I think you are revealing the bias in your intent.  If a person wishes to review more information from anti-racist or civil rights organizations on the topic, they have 7 reference links to follow.SMWIA (talk) 22:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't add anyting this article! According to the edit history users AzureCitizen and BlueRedPurpleGreen did. I only have reverted you along with user Haminoon. You said that you'll remove the Krager section in 24 hours. (Not 24 hours yet.) BerlinKid22 (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continual Vandalism and POV insertion 

message: SMWIA is constantly removing the Gangs in the United States category. There are plenty of references for Volksfront being a gang and being in the United States in the article, including the article ""Campaign aims to stop gang recruiting". -- haminoon (talk) 11:02, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Volksfront denying allegations is not reliable either. Many Volksfront members had criminal records before joining. Randal Lee Krager admitted spending time in prison. Besides actions speak louder than words. Every time a Volksfront member was on the news for a crime, Volksfront would cop out on them. That's not true brotherhood! You claimed that the sources are unreliable because they come from Jewish people? Volksfront is recognized as a gang by local authorities. If they were so peaceful then why did they disbanded? Why did they attracted the attention of the local authorities? Stop removing content. I'll fix the new section, but you got to stop. "Your skin color pisses me off, but I intend to get over it." - Brandon Vespermann "Didn't like my high school so I decided to blow it up" - Randal Krager " "I like the hatred that most white nationalist viewed towards minorities, to the hatred of a cancer patient has towards his cancer cells." - Corey J. Miller "Volksfront is a hateful origination, they believed that the Government is being run by Zionist" - anonymous 'former' member
 can you please review this dispute. Many users have reverted SMWIA (talk). ----BlueRedPurpleGreen (talk) 17:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

text: SMWIA, you have removed a lot of material for being "biased" but I can't see what is biased it about it. I assume you aren't disputing it was factual. It doesn't appear to be worded in a biased way. Would you care to explain why each sentence should be removed? -- haminoon (talk) 10:58, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

text: "Police claimed that his crime was not racially motivated, but a judge said that the evidence of Krager being a skinhead, and having a swastika tattoo was enough to convicted him of a hate crime.[8][9][7]" Are you blind? It clearly says that police claimed that his crime was NOT racially motivated! If you have a problem with the Krager section, then talk to  who reedit the paragraph.  ----BlueRedPurpleGreen (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What seems to be the problem here? I don't see anything bias on this article. As a German person, I like for this groups to be expose for what they really are becuase they give my people a bad name, but I also don't like anyting bias to be on the wikipedia artilces. Krager has a huge criminal history, so how is it bias to add what he did to this article? I already removed some bias inputs, but the rest seem valid. Please explain yourself with a neutral stand. Not all sources come from ADL and the SPLC. BerlinKid22 (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is much of your material is non-factual and is based on non-neutral sources.  7 of 13 references are from self-avowed anti-racist, civil rights or far left sources, which is over half.  The view point of anti-racist/anti-fascist organizations are well, if not over, represented.  I am leaving those references but deleting your additional content.  Berlinkid22, in your statement "As a German person, I like for this groups to be expose for what they really are becuase they give my people a bad name" I think you are revealing the bias in your intent.  If a person wishes to review more information from anti-racist or civil rights organizations on the topic, they have 7 reference links to follow.SMWIA (talk) 22:05, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't add anyting this article! According to the edit history users AzureCitizen and BlueRedPurpleGreen did. I only have reverted you along with user Haminoon. You said that you'll remove the Krager section in 24 hours. (Not 24 hours yet.) BerlinKid22 (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  gang category