Talk:Spiked (magazine)

message: I just want to raise a brief point here. Those who have edited the main page have made liberal usage of the opinions of journalist George Monbiot in constructing their arguments. 
What I feel is concerning is the implication that Monbiot's opinions of the magazine are definitive. Monbiot is a well known left wing journalist who writes for the Guardian. 
Why do the editors of the main page feel that Monbiot's views carry sufficient weight for them to be used in this way? I would not (for example) consider journalist Toby Young to be either "hard" or "far" Right as the quotation implies, any more than I might consider Monbiot to be "hard" or "far" Left. I don't know if the quotation is accurate, but in any event, Monbiot would view Young as his political opposition. 
Monbiot is entitled to his views, but they are hardly non-partisan. I cannot speak for the magazine, but they would probably say they are defending the principle of free speech and not the views of the people themselves. Monbiot, however, seeks to smear the magazine by association with public figures that he considers to be undesirable. And as a figure of the Left Monbiot might be expected to do this.
There seems to be (in my opinion) too much eagerness among wikipedia editors to take sides and push a particular view, and then quote from media sources which tend to support that view. This article strikes me as politically biased.
But the function of wikipedia is surely to present information in a completely unbiased and non partisan way. The reader must be left to form their own opinion. John2o2o2o (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Monbiot's opinions are definitive? 

message: Hallo, and I hope you had a good Christmas. You have referred to Munira Mirza as a regular contributor to Spiked.   But I have just done a search for her on the Spiked website, and the most recent article by her which I saw is dated 2017. Most of the articles which come up on the search date from 2007. I don’t remember seeing any article by her in the last few years. So I think you need to amend your wording. Regards. Sweet6970 (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Would just "contributor" work ? I've taken this from Beckett in the Guardian, a secondary source, rather than done original research in the primary sources. BobFromBrockley (talk) 23:07, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I think just 'constributor' would work. Sweet6970 (talk) 23:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: done. BobFromBrockley (talk) 01:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Munira Mirza’s contributions to ''Spiked'' 

message: I question its labelling as "libertarian". It was founded from Marxism and never publishes economically liberal content, instead its editor and Brendan O'Neil are obvious socialists who support radical trade unionism (read their articles on strike action) and oppose free market capitalism. Just because it may sway from standard "liberal left" politics does not make it truly right-wing, as economics is typically the most important factor to determining something's place on the political spectrum. In addition, I can't believe no commentary has been added to Wikipedia about its largely anti-transgender (and anti-LGBT and anti-drag) articles which frequently appear. This makes me actually regard as it as Marxist/socialist which disregards social liberalism/progressivism instead. 2.98.183.194 (talk) 19:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Brendan O’Neill describes himself as a Marxist Libertarian: being libertarian does not automatically mean you are right-wing. But as far as Wikipedia is concerned, when describing the political stance of a person or organisation, we do not use the assessment of Wikipedia editors, we use what has been said in reliable sources. The present description of the stance of this magazine is based on the sources referenced in the article. If you think this should be changed, then please provide suitable sources. Sweet6970 (talk) 11:31, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In addition, why is there nothing about its largely anti-trans stance? Just go its web page and you'll find tons of pieces attacking transgender people, drag, and most other things LGBT. 2.98.183.194 (talk) 19:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If reliable sources can be found (third-party ones; i.e. not from Spiked itself) calling Spiked anti-trans, transphobic, anti-LGBT, etc or similar then we could add it into the article using this sources as citations. Please see (WP:BEBOLD). If you feel like you might struggle to place this into the article with the necessary sources (or for whatever other reason can't or don't want to, or feel comfortable to do so etc) you could add the links to any reliable sources calling Spiked as such here and I or another editor may be able to integrate them into the article. All the best. Helper201 (talk) 19:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

text: The truth is, it will mostly be all primary source content. 2.98.183.194 (talk) 20:18, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Libertarian?