Talk:Oliver Kamm

message: Is there a reason somebody has added "primary source needed" to much of this article despite it not being appropriate or used correctly? 92.7.26.190 (talk) 18:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: There are six primary source tags. Two are for articles by Kamm and published on his blog. The other four are for articles written by Kamm. All are primary sources for Kamm's own bio. Burrobert (talk) 03:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Primary Sources

message: Who is the "himself" whom Kamm is accusing Chomsky of quoting selectively? I can't see the source at the moment, but it's not clear if it's a filter, connection problem or if the link is dead. From the context, I get the impression that Kamm is accusing Chomsky of quoting Kamm selectively, but grammatically it looks like Kamm is accusing Chomsky of quoting Chomsky selectively. Is it actually the former? And if so, would I be right in thinking the grammar here needs tweaking. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:15, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: In context it means Chomsky quotes himself selectively. Chomsky argued that Kamm quotes him selectively, ignoring or not denying the extensive quotations of material which Chomsky marshaled as evidence for the views he holds. All of this section is crap.Nishidani (talk) 13:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "quoting himself selectively"? 

message: "Because of his position on war and terrorism, the commentator Peter Wilby asserted that Kamm is not actually left-wing at all"
This reads that it is Wilby's position. I suspect the writer meant Kamm's position.
I won't adjust it until I can discover what was actually meant. The ref. seems to have gone from the NS.Cannonmc (talk) 03:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for spotting the broken link. Wilby was writing about Kamm. Philip Cross (talk) 09:04, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Updated link and clarified. Philip Cross (talk) 09:56, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whose position? 

message: The article reads like a CV. Keith-264 (talk) 17:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising? 

message: I have now reverted the contentious passage more than three times within the last 24 hours. Its inclusion has already led to this page being blocked to new or unregistered users for two days, so I feel I have not edited outside established policies. I refer other editors to WP:3RRNO, exemption #7, which would appear to be applicable here, and states: "Removing violations of the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy that contain libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced contentious material". Philip Cross (talk) 10:17, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: BLP and 3RR

message: Prior to his career in journalism, Kamm worked as Head of Strategic Research for Commerzbank Securities during the time the bank was under investigation for corruption and European Equity Strategist for HSBC Securities. Bambaleo76 (talk) 13:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 14:51, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier career 

message: This was not a WP article, but somebody's essay about him, picking this column by him or that one to weave a story. That is not what we do here.   Like a lot of pundits there are not a lot of sources that just describe him that we can summarize. Hm. Jytdog (talk) 02:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I have removed a lot of edits on here relating to primary sources; this may be a tad overkill but I think it's one way to partially remedy the issue. --Bangalamania (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits 

message: The claim that Oliver Kamm wrote a blog article entitled 'The Islamphobia' Scam" and in it he wrote: 
"To that end, I note from Harry's Place that my comrades have been nominated by an absurd lobby calling itself the Islamic Human Rights Commission for an "Islamophobia" award (according to its organisers, "an annual event to acknowledge - through satire, revue and comedy - the worst Islamophobes of the year"). Other nominees in the UK include Tony Blair and Sky News. Sky's citation reads: "For being a prominent vehicle for anti Muslim propaganda, harboring [sic] bias in the [sic] every report and every question asked". I went on Sky News not long ago to debate a man called Asghar Bukhari of another grandiloquently named lobby group, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, and can confirm that the presenter, Kay Burley, insisted on posing him loaded questions such as "what's your reply to that, Asghar?"
I was mildly surprised that the nominees did not include the political editor of the New Statesman, Martin Bright, for his important work in detailing the remarkably uncritical dialogue going on between the Foreign Office and Islamist groups. So I nominated him myself. I cannot claim to have done anything like the exhaustive work and analysis that he has done on this subject, but if any reader wishes to nominate me and I am successful, you can be sure I'll turn up to collect the award and express my reasons for pride in it."
is correctly sourced (WP:ABOUTSELF) and fits all the criteria for relevancy (WP:ROC). If you do not wish it to appear in the article please quote the exact Wikipedia guidelines that would be breached by including it. Here is a link to the blog https://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2006/10/the_islamophobi.html 83.218.151.178 (talk) 13:34, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you wish to discuss this please state whether your objection is that Oliver Kamm didn't write the blog post titled 'The Islamphobia' Scam" and in it he wrote: 
"To that end, I note from Harry's Place that my comrades have been nominated by an absurd lobby calling itself the Islamic Human Rights Commission for an "Islamophobia" award (according to its organisers, "an annual event to acknowledge - through satire, revue and comedy - the worst Islamophobes of the year"). Other nominees in the UK include Tony Blair and Sky News. Sky's citation reads: "For being a prominent vehicle for anti Muslim propaganda, harboring [sic] bias in the [sic] every report and every question asked". I went on Sky News not long ago to debate a man called Asghar Bukhari of another grandiloquently named lobby group, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, and can confirm that the presenter, Kay Burley, insisted on posing him loaded questions such as "what's your reply to that, Asghar?"
I was mildly surprised that the nominees did not include the political editor of the New Statesman, Martin Bright, for his important work in detailing the remarkably uncritical dialogue going on between the Foreign Office and Islamist groups. So I nominated him myself. I cannot claim to have done anything like the exhaustive work and analysis that he has done on this subject, but if any reader wishes to nominate me and I am successful, you can be sure I'll turn up to collect the award and express my reasons for pride in it."
Or if you objection is the subject of this article did write an article titled 'The Islamphobia' Scam" and in it he wrote: 
"To that end, I note from Harry's Place that my comrades have been nominated by an absurd lobby calling itself the Islamic Human Rights Commission for an "Islamophobia" award (according to its organisers, "an annual event to acknowledge - through satire, revue and comedy - the worst Islamophobes of the year"). Other nominees in the UK include Tony Blair and Sky News. Sky's citation reads: "For being a prominent vehicle for anti Muslim propaganda, harboring [sic] bias in the [sic] every report and every question asked". I went on Sky News not long ago to debate a man called Asghar Bukhari of another grandiloquently named lobby group, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, and can confirm that the presenter, Kay Burley, insisted on posing him loaded questions such as "what's your reply to that, Asghar?"
I was mildly surprised that the nominees did not include the political editor of the New Statesman, Martin Bright, for his important work in detailing the remarkably uncritical dialogue going on between the Foreign Office and Islamist groups. So I nominated him myself. I cannot claim to have done anything like the exhaustive work and analysis that he has done on this subject, but if any reader wishes to nominate me and I am successful, you can be sure I'll turn up to collect the award and express my reasons for pride in it."
But the subject of this page writing a page titled 'The Islamphobia' Scam" and in it he wrote: 
"To that end, I note from Harry's Place that my comrades have been nominated by an absurd lobby calling itself the Islamic Human Rights Commission for an "Islamophobia" award (according to its organisers, "an annual event to acknowledge - through satire, revue and comedy - the worst Islamophobes of the year"). Other nominees in the UK include Tony Blair and Sky News. Sky's citation reads: "For being a prominent vehicle for anti Muslim propaganda, harboring [sic] bias in the [sic] every report and every question asked". I went on Sky News not long ago to debate a man called Asghar Bukhari of another grandiloquently named lobby group, the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, and can confirm that the presenter, Kay Burley, insisted on posing him loaded questions such as "what's your reply to that, Asghar?"
I was mildly surprised that the nominees did not include the political editor of the New Statesman, Martin Bright, for his important work in detailing the remarkably uncritical dialogue going on between the Foreign Office and Islamist groups. So I nominated him myself. I cannot claim to have done anything like the exhaustive work and analysis that he has done on this subject, but if any reader wishes to nominate me and I am successful, you can be sure I'll turn up to collect the award and express my reasons for pride in it."
is not notable.
Thank you 83.218.151.178 (talk) 14:18, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Since the original webpage has now been taken down by the author, here is the archived version http://web.archive.org/web/20191128121848/https://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2006/10/the_islamophobi.html 83.218.151.178 (talk) 09:51, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Islamphobia 

message: Information to be added or removed: add the line "Kamm has written that he considers Islamophobia to be a 'scam' and in 2006 asked readers of his blog to nominate him for an 'Islamophobia award'."
Explanation of issue: Kamm wrote an article titled "The Islamphobia Scam' in 2016 and asked the readers of his blog to nominate him for an 'Islamophobia award'. This is notable (WP:N) and sourced (see below)
References supporting change: http://web.archive.org/web/20191128121848/https://oliverkamm.typepad.com/blog/2006/10/the_islamophobi.html
83.218.151.178 (talk) 09:55, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: We need multiple reliable secondary sources discussing this to warrant inclusion. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:30, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  In this case I believe that multiple sources are not required, see WP:BLPSELFPUB. According to the guidelines, multiple sources are not required in cases of 'Using the subject as a self-published source'. If you disagree please remove all the information from this article that only comes from a single piece the subject has written and nowhere else, in order to maintain consistency.  83.218.151.178 (talk) 16:40, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've reopened this request as in my view the editors have not give sufficient grounds for denying it 80.47.148.59 (talk) 08:41, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:BLPSELFPUB is mainly for uncontroversial material such as birthdates and occasionally where people grew up. If secondary sources have not taken note of this then we don't include it. Wikipedia does not summarize all the blog posts bloggers have written, we summarize what secondary sources have taken note of. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:30, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm glad to see that we've reached the consensus that Oliver Kamm did write a blog post titled 'The Islamophobia Scam" and asked the readers of his blog to nominate him for an 'Islamophobia award'. but we have agreed that it's not notable that he did so. This is good editing 80.47.148.59 (talk) 02:03, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  As there is a consensus for Kamm writing a blog post titled by him 'The Islamophobia Scam' I will readd it. If you object to that please comment below 80.47.137.128 (talk) 01:04, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Some proposed changes

message: Please add the line "Oliver Kamm is a supporter of Dutch Politician Geert Wilders". Here is an article he wrote titled 'Wilders must be supported' https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2010/10/wilders-must-be-supported/ which should be a sufficient source. If this is denied due to there not being multiple sources please quote the wikipedia guidelines that say every claim requires multiple sources and delete all the claims on this page that do not have multiple sources. Thank you 83.218.151.178 (talk) 09:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not what his article says, it says Kamm opposes prosecution of Wilders for expressing his view. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:32, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why not add a bit about how he wrote an article opposing Wilders being prosecuted for expressing his views that Islam and Nazism are comparable? 83.218.151.178 (talk) 11:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I assume the consensus is as above since nobody objects 80.47.148.59 (talk) 11:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Geert Wilders

message: Does anyone know why Oliver deleted all his blog posts after they were brought up here? 83.218.151.178 (talk) 11:32, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone? It's not like he wrote anything embarrassing like "I'm an antiSemite" or "I'm a Islamophobe" in them"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.148.59 (talk) 02:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Blog

message: I see from prior discussions here that reference to Kamm's long standing dispute with journalist Neil Clark has been added & removed on numerous occasions. As the case is now settled & Kamm has effectively retracted many of the allegations he made against Clark, including calling him a racist, a genocide denier & an anti-immigration campaigner, would it be appropriate to include that information now? 
The source is a statement from Kamm which he tweeted on 20 March 2020. 
https://twitter.com/OliverKamm/status/1241138003780800512  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeltaSnowQueen (talk • contribs) 12:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy Section - Libel Case 

message: Middle East Monitor is not an unbiased source - in fact, quite the opposite - it is extremely biased and anti-Israel. The article cited contains nothing but anti-Kamm quotes, and so cannot in any way be construed as neutral (which is what Wikipedia sources are supposed to be, to my understanding). I suspect the user who restored that source after I deleted it is highly biased themselves. - 980throwawy (talk • contribs) 16:22, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Being biased does not by itself preclude the use of a source, as all people and sources have biases. If it is so biased that it should not be considered a reliable source, with fact checking and editorial control, please obtain a consensus for that at the reliable sources noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biased sources 

message: Is there a reason the Philip Cross controversy that follows him is not mentioned?
It's been covered by the BBC and indeed written about by Oliver himself. Jimjom (talk) 13:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Which BBC article are you referring to? I can't see one that mentions Kamm. Bellowhead678 (talk) 18:41, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: He references the controversy himself as one of his bigger scandals, id say it warrants inclusion?  Jimjom (talk) 06:59, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philip Cross 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Oliver Kamm/Archive 1 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Oliver Kamm/Archive 1" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]