Talk:Alex Linder

message: This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 00:58, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote for Deletion 

message: Other than simply a bias against VNN, also known as a "POV", I cna see no reason whatsoever that my edits of last month were reverted to the prior extraordinarily flawed version which uses loaded words and hate language to deride Mr. Linder, rather than descriptive terms and facts. For instance, the current flawed version constantly refers to VNN and Alex Linder as "White Supremacist", whatever that is. I don't think there's anyone on Earth who is a "White Supremacist." There are "White Nationalists" and "White Separatists" (approximately the same) but no one who contributes to VNN has any time to worry about one race being "better" or "superior" to another. The position of VNN and of Alex Linder for that matter, is that we wish our race to survive, that our race is under dire threat from such Jewish-promoted schemes as miscegenation, integration, hate crime laws, "civil rights" laws, etc. VNNers don't wish to rule over or dominate other peoples, we seek only self-determination and a nation exclusively of our own people, not because we're "superior" to those other people, but because we believe that life is best and healthiest when our race can be unto itself and self-governing. Secondarily, there are other minor things, such as the assertion that Alex Linder left the NA after "allowing critisim of it on his site" or some such silliness. The simple fact is that Alex left the NA and began criticising it's new leadership after it became apparent that the new leadership did not share Dr. Pierce's vision for the organization, or for Our Cause, that the new leadership was likely corrupt, and certainly was not acting in the best interests of the race. The simple fact is, the article, being on Wikipedia, purports to be from a Neutral Point of View, yet it's written as though some ARA commie thug wrote it. This constant reversion back to edits done by moderators or "approved" commies, despite improvements to NPOV by those whose edits are being reverted, is getting very old, and gives wikipedia a bad name amongst those not squarely in this peculiar political mindset found here. One of the worst examples of POV bias is how you people always quote some ADL or SPLC jew hack and his inflammatory opinion about the subject, but when I put a blurb in about how VNN supporters find Mr. Linder's spintros appealing, that gets deleted too. So you can cite the opinions of those who hate Alex Linder, just not the opinions of those who like Alex Linder? WTF is that?!?!?
:His statements that "[w]hites already know blacks are stupid, violent, destructive apelike creatures" and that "Jews are nation wreckers. We WHITE MEN created the nations they wreck. It is time for us to engage in wrecking of our own. DEATH TO THE JEWS" don't sound like someone who has "[no] time to worry about one race being better or superior to another." SlimVirgin (talk) 02:10, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is it that when factual material is published that points out the largely ignorant opinions of others there is suddenly a call to "neutrality"? Either Linder said these things, or he didn't. If he didn't we'll remove them. If he did, well then, who's stupidity is that? - Ta bu shi da yu 14:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constant reversion of edits which actually improve the NPOV of the article and or fix errors of fact 

message: The quote about "A woman who can think". There to show his sexism. I can't figure out how to get the precise date he wrote that... My bad most likely. There's also quite a bit in that news update showing what seems to be pretty heavy paranoia about the medical profession. Anyway, I put it up because while his sexism is often ignored in favour of his racism, it's pretty heavy. And actually counterproductive, given that if he wants the white race or whatnot to reproduce, it would seem sort of obvious that women might be desirable. Heh heh. --Edward Wakelin 19:54, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Boy- that is about the tamest piece of text on the page you got it from. That said, we probably have enough quotations. If anyone wants to add more we should either remove some or ship the whole set over to Wikiquotes. -Willmcw 02:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Tame, but telling... I've seen non-VNN racists mock Linder as, basically, a scared little boy... He's not married, is he? I know comments are made to the effect of "If he cares so much about the white race, why isn't he getting married and fathering white children?"--216.191.209.118 16:15, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added a quote, but can't figure some things out 

message: I've removed the "Quotations" section from this article, as stated in Wikipedia:Quotations: "...editors should try and work quotations into the body of the article, rather than in a stand alone quote section. Wikipedia is not a list or repository of loosely associated topics such as quotations. A simple list of quotations would be better suited for our sister project, Wikiquote."
The quotations in this article don't add to it; if there's a point being made, then make it, and back it up with a quote, this isn't a place to advertise his "snappy" lines. -Toon05 20:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations 

message: Calling Vanguard News Network isn't neutral, even if it's true. You can say they've said things considered by some as racist and cite it. How about let's all just let the reader decide that Vanguard is a racist news network.--Ipatrol (talk) 01:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I do care if VNN is racist, but, in any event, the article doesn't use that word. It does use the words antisemitic and White supremacist in the lead without references, but the lead summarizes later paragraphs which are well sourced. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 06:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not a "reach" per se to call VNN racist. They literally use the n-word, the 6 letter f-word without ANY restraint whatsoever; enough to make a Klansman blush. Just as it is a false statement to call someone a racist when they are not, it is equally dishonest and fallacious to gloss it over when the subject in question, Alex Linder, <redacted>; he believes that <redacted>. Rock8591 (talk) 19:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If you define racism in it's truest and deepest meening, you will find that vnn is not in any way racist. In fact, most things which are classified as racist, simply are not. --98.236.11.20 (talk) 03:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Racism has many hotly contested meanings and has different definitions depending on who you're talking to. It shouldn't even be used at all. 50.29.16.122 (talk) 09:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  I don't care if Vanguard is racist, it's not our place to say that 

message: (pasted from a userpage discussion on retaining or deleting mention of/link to Linder's thoroughly hateful blog)DavidOaks (talk) 21:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I could be wrong, but I don't think it's an appropriate link. At the very least, it should contain a warning. Enigmamsg 21:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's about as ugly a thing as there is on the net, but WP isn't censored. It's one of his chief activities, therfore requires notice in his article. Now, it's a separate question whether we're within wikipolicy in deliberately doing away with both the title of the page and the link. I'm going to paste this discussion on the article's talk-page, and see what kind of discussion it might bring out. DavidOaks (talk) 21:57, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The relevant policy can be found at WP:EL. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 18:07, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly fits this: "What should be linked ...Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any." But it sooo fails the "tasteful" canon -- tho' on the other hand, tastelessness is what the guy's all about, and nothing could illustrate him more honestly than his own website (thus, I don't see that any WP:BLP restrictions apply. Now, there's a natural reluctance to give the guy a platform, but I'm not sure that's a wikiprincipled way to think about this. DavidOaks (talk) 19:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think a warning is necessary because the entire article makes clear what the subject's views are. While those views are distasteful to many, if not most, people, this project isn't censored. By comparison, we also have articles on nasty porn with external links.   Will Beback  talk   20:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website 

message: Steven J. Anderson, I have discovered and cited that his middle name is Ruedy.  173.51.128.50 (talk) 00:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middle Name 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Alex Linder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110909164547/http://articles.boston.com/2011-03-10/news/29343665_1_white-supremacist-day-parade-route-mark-potok to http://articles.boston.com/2011-03-10/news/29343665_1_white-supremacist-day-parade-route-mark-potok
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is his full name "Milton Alexander Linder" "Alexander Ruedy Linder"? He frequently goes by "Alex Ruedy Linder". Kart2401real (talk) 22:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full name