Talk:MEChA

message: I fixed a statement at the end of the "History" section which seemed to imply that the Ch to X change has to do with the way in which the Nahautl prounounced the letter X. This is an ignorant statement at best, the Nahuatl had no knowledge of the letter "X" and much less how to pronounce it, as it is part of the European Roman alphabet, a group which the Nahuatl never had contact with and whos last common ancestor were likely the ancient Dravidians of Europe, whom had no alphabet. 
The reason many translations of Nahuatl words to Spanish use the letter "X" to represent the modern Spanish "Ch" is because this was the proper letter for designating that phoneme during the era which the colonists first came in contact with the Nahuatl; it has nothing to do with the Nahuatl's preference for one letter over the other. The Nahuatl language uses an ideogram/logogram style of writing which has absolutely no similarities with the Western Spanish style of writing or alphabet.
Actually, the Ch to X changes IS influenced by Nahuatl.  There are numerous Nahuatl codices written in Latin script.  Nahuatl scribes began using Latin script after Spain took control in the valley of Mexico.  The letter X was used for the Nahuatl "sh" sound.  The Spanish and the Nahuatlacah (Nahuatl speaking people) of the Colonial Era never used X to represent Ch.  The reason, though, the X often replaces the Ch is due to the perceived error of the use of Ch in the term Chicano.  There are many theories as to the origin of the word Chicano.  One of them states that Chicano comes from the word Mexicano. It is theorized that, due to their poor Spanish pronunciation, the X was pronounced as Ch instead.  Some activists chose to correct this by using the X to correct the spelling and thus call themselves Xicano.  Nevertheless, even with this correction many of these activists still pronounce X in Xicano with the Ch sound.  It is a confusing phenomenon to say the least.Benzambrano (talk) 19:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy correction

message: Can anyone rouse up some old timers to weigh in on this phrase? I remember seeing Mecha logos from the 1960s-1970s with the old logo (An eagle warrior head) and the words "Por La Raza, Habla el Espiritu".  I have never seen the other phrase from El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan ever being used, and I belonged to 2 MEChA chapters!  As a side note, I have been looking up MEChA in search engines over the years, I first saw a lot of Japanese Anime sites come up.  Around the late 90s, VDARE started propagating the  boiler plate for what every vigilante-type group would later on spew (It's origins having come from La Voz De Aztlan and VCT).  There was a group called "Voices of Citizens Together", based in Los Angeles, that started printing full page ads with the infamous map of Mexico including reconquered Aztlan during the run up to the Proposition 187 vote in 1994. 
- 66.214.138.219
No place called "Aztlan" ever existed in what is now the Southwest United States, so exactly what do you mean by "reconquered Aztlan"?
Is this the sort of nonsense being taught in MEChA? If so, the group needs to be investigated by the FBI, de-funded, thrown off of every campus in the United States, and disbanded.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by CheyenneZ (talk • contribs) 20:13, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Por La Raza Redux

message: The problem with these items (MEChA and Chicano Nationalism) is that they looks more like a propaganda pieces (particularly, MEChA) than "neutral" desctiptions. The apologetic tone in MEChA is so obvious, and the contents is so illogical (like an explanation that "race" means "community" and "Chicano" means virtualy any person of arbitraty ethnicity.
MEChA description glorifies that organization's political objectives, that are not all benign, to say the least, yet some editors just guy keep erasing my criticism of MEChA's agenda and methods to show up on that papge. Confront is with epithets targeting MEChA critics that aren't nearly as "gentle" as anything you seem to be able to tolerate on that page. 
DonKichot 10:35, 22 September 2006 (PDT)
::You've engaged in edit warring with the sole objective of making your unsourced political commentary a permanent fixture on the page.  You have yet to try to reach consensus with other editors.  If you notice, the article is full of explanations of MeCha's from both pro and con sources.  Almost every statement can also be backed up, again, from both the pro and con side of the issues.  You are more than welcome to help in editing this article to make it better but please try to locate sources for your edits and cut the edit warring out. Mosquito-001 18:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Politically biased and not neutral (apologetic)

message: To explain some of my edits:
MEChA is widely criticized for being a racist and separatist organization, 
True, and NPOV.
whose openly stated goals constitute treason to the United States. 
The accusation of "treason", is a subset of those who see MEChA as racist/seperatist, it is not a "wide criticism".  After all, "treason" is a specific crime that requires more than just words to commit.
Some of the more overtly objectionable, and often deemed treasonous, goals and ideas expressed in El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán include:
To NPOV this, I chose to quote the actual text of El Plan, and to explain the interpretations of MEChA and its critics.
All of these are generally seen as calls to negate and subvert American national unity, equality before the law for all American citizens, and territorial integrity of the nation. 
"Generally seen" is misleading.  This would imply that this is a widely accepted viewpoint, which is false.  Is the existence of native american nations within the US "subversive" of national unity?
There is no doubt that if similar goals were openly published by a political organization of a different ethnicity, such as the Caucasian Americans, such an organization would be immediately, and rightly, recognized as fascist and suppressed. 
This is an argument of moral equivalence between, say, the KKK and MEChA.  It overlooks the counterargument that the KKK and MEChA are fundamentally different in that one is a majority group of already-privileged members that uses widespread violence to achieve its means, whereas MEChA born during the civil rights era, a minority and underprivileged group (objectively), and HASN'T used violence and in fact eschews it.
:Rubbish. MEChA HAVE used violence -- objectively -- and your blather about justifying this hate group's activities because of its being "minority" blah blah blah "underprivileged" is the worst kind of far-left apologia.  Please do not edit articles since you are so obviously biased.
Anyways, the use of the terms of "There is no doubt ..." and "immediately and rightly recognized as fascist" is very much non-NPOV, so I am cutting it.
Many mechistas, perhaps including the leadership, may claim that they do not actually espouse such radical notions, especially when they are questioned by conservative media. However, it is notable that MEChA has never officially repudiated any of these declarations. This creates an impression that the organization serves as an umbrella for a wide variety of organization and activists, some of them benign social service or political action groups, and others subversive radical ones.
"perhaps"?  "may"?  Is wikipedia a dumping ground of rampant speculation now?  If the leadership claims that they do not espouse such radical notions, doesn't that contradict the following statement that MEChA hasn't officially repudiated any of these declarations?  I'm cutting this until "perhaps" and "may" can be confirmed, and also this discreprancy can be resolved.
People, I have just created articles on Plan Espiritual de Aztlan and Plan de Santa Barbara. I feel that we need to try to distribute the material properly between these, when there is free time at least :). I feel that the tone of the article right now, which by the way was partially inflicted by myself, is probably not-neutral because of a focus on Plan of Aztlan. That being said, I believe that we really should emphasize the separatist nature of the movement, as reflected in the mechista Plan de Santa Barbara and their founding constitution, which also actually deserves its own article. Watcher 02:58, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Watcher's Comments

message: It is interesting that an openly-racist, separatist, hate group like MEChA comes off sounding like a Boy Scout troop for Mexicans. "MEChA is in many ways the modern day Ku Klux Klan of Chicanos...(and) a racist organization that advocates revolution and segregation" http://www.stanfordreview.org/Archive/Volume_XXXI/Issue_2/Editorial/editorial1.shtml 
Not a mention here on Wikipedia of the group's OTHER slogan, which is "Por La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada.” [For the race, everything. For those outside the race, nothing.]
Not a mention here on Wikipedia of the numerous violent, racist acts of thuggery the group (aka "The Tan Klan") has engaged in, including a 1996 attack on black and white americans protesting illegal immigration and 1993 protests for a "Chicano Studies" department at UCLA that caused $500,000 in damage as radicals occupied buildings. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95871,00.html
From vDare.com 
"In 1995, A Latino INS officer was killed in California. The University of California-San Diego chapter of Mecha published an editorial in its newspaper, Voz Fronteriza, called "Death of a Migra Pig."
Sample:
'We're glad this pig died, he deserved to die . . . All the Migra pigs should be killed, every single one...the only good one is a dead one...The time to fight back is now. It is time to organize an anti-Migra patrol...It is to [sic] bad that more Migra pigs didn't die with him.'"
See also http://www.americanpatrol.com/MECHA/MigraPigPaper-950500.html
The group's literature is peppered with hate speech.
I don't think this article could be more POV if it tried.  I literally do not recognize MEChA as it is depicted here.  There is no question that it is a separatist group; it is avowedly so.
:Yes, it is a particularly shameful whitewash.  Why don't you work to fix it, with sources? Jayjg (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. All those Mexicans lynching Whites!!!! Its 1930s America all over again. Oh wait... 209.137.144.70 (talk) 23:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Haha yeah, I just looked them up. However he is right, that the MeCha in the Criticism sounds much different than the MeCha in the rest of the article. Perhaps some branches of MeCha are nationalistic, but the MeCha at my school (in San Diego) isn't separatist, racist, or a hate group. They simply show people in the club the right way how to be an activist within a community without being a menace. They actually helped end the immigration reform protesting at my school a year back to get it of the campus and away from school hours. And this is coming from a Caucasian who's never been in the club. Surely not every group is like this, but i find them actually strikingly similar to the Boy Scouts- Not Every Branch Is The Same.72.199.100.223 (talk) 05:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extreme, blatent Bias. 

message: I think the above commentator has made the mistake of taking the actions of a few MEChistas as indicative of the group as a whole.  MEChA is a fairly diverse group, and it would be suprising if there weren't a few extremists among them.  You can always cherry pick examples, especially if your sources are sites like VDARE and American Patrol, which the ADL and SPLC have both identified as a hate groups.  You don't recognize MEChA as it's depicted here?  I doubt you'd recognize MEChA if you went and sat in on their meetings.  Have you ever met a MEChista?  I don't claim to have known many, but the ones I have dealt with were not radical in the slightest.
If a fraternity member casts racial epithets and sparks a riot, it doesn't follow that everyone in that fraternity shares his views.  If Martin Luther writes a treatise entitiled On the Jews and their Lies, it doesn't mean all Lutherans are anti-semites.  If a pro-life activist bombs an abortion clinic, it does not mean that all pro-lifers condone such activity.  And if one webmaster in one chapter of MEChA makes a single link to Voz de Aztlan, it does not mean that Voz de Aztlan is official spokespiece for all MEChA.
MEChA-related acts of violence, while not to be condoned or to be brushed aside lightly, are few and far between; the comparison to the KKK is disingenuous.  The Standford Review article you quoted admits as much: "We are in no way suggesting that MEChA is an organization that lynches and terrorizes other races in the manner the KKK has in the past, nor has MEChA been the cause of intimidation, pain, and anguish as has the KKK".  For the overwhelming majority of MEChistas, MEChA is the cultural and educational organization for Latinos, and nothing more.  Indeed, MEChA has last a great deal of its radical edge over the past decades, and you can clearly see that reflected in more modern documents like Philosophy of MEChA, which emphsize education as MEChA's first and foremost goal.
Por la raza, todo, fuera de la raza, nada is not a slogan of MEChA, let alone the "other" slogan.  It's a quote lifted from El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán (and is discussed there).  "For those outside the race, nothing" is a misleading translation; the word "those" (aquellos, or la gente, or any synonym) doesn't exist in the Spanish original.  The translation of por as "for" is also a bit sketchy (although por can mean "for", it usually means "by").
The damage done in the 1993 UCLA disturbance has been inflated by an order of magnitude of more: the real value was $35,000 to $50,000, not half a million dollars as you'll find in most reports.  Again, not to condone or to dismiss lightly, but this is an example of the distortions you find on the internet by sources that have an axe to grind.
-- Cashton 6/1/2005
Just my two cents, I was a mechista in the mid 1990s.  The leadership in my local MEChAs varied from radical to social and almost apolitical.  The rank and file also ranged from radicals, to college students looking for a good time, to people with political aspirations.  Much of the conservative commentary characterizing MEChA as a hate group stems from Southern California -based VDARE and the fodder provided to them by "La Voz de Aztlan", which IIRC had ties to RCP and other crackpot organizations during my time. La Voz de Aztlan is so over the top and antisemitic, it makes one wonder if it is not the product of some COINTELPRO type operatives.  I don't remember any people from La Voz de Aztlan ever being known MEChistAs, yet somehow all the information about MEChA run by the right is gleaned from them and "El Plan Espiritual de Aztlan", which AFAIK was regarded as a piece of poetry by Alurista, not some kind of manifesto.
Pozole 21:46, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a Hate Group 

message: Can anyone explain why this article is being added to :category: Neo-Nazi movements and concepts. It seems inappropriate. -Willmcw 00:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ummm, no.  This is a "Mexiklan" hate group.  Adding it back to "neo-nazi" groups and "racism," where this fascist hate group belongs.  Zuzim 09:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I'll believe that when you become president of your very own Mecha chapter. Mosquito-001 16:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neo-Nazi movements and concepts 

message: I have done major re-edits and have removed the POV tag. We need an article that defines the organization, which was actually pretty tame in the 1970's. The article mentions some controversies, let's put the controversies there. I am not sure the polical campaigns are relevant here. Am about to strike them as well. Joaquin Murietta 05:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV and Encyclopedic Style

message: I think this famous phrase associated with Mecha deserves a place in this article but it deserves clarification, which you won't find on anything associated with vdare.  See the hate group wiki if you need an explanation why vdare isn't a very credible source when it comes to these things.  In the mean time, I've put in the explantion found on El Plan Espiritual de Aztlán. It seems to be pretty non biased. Mosquito-001 02:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Mosquito, but the Cruz Bustamante mention seems to have disappeared. Cruz Bustamante was the whole point of that bullet item. --hitssquad 02:34, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seemed that a huge part of the Cruz Bustamante story was cut off.  I looked on the Bustamante wiki and couldn't find the rest of the story either(thus my edit mentioning that you look at the bustamante wiki).  Was it meant to be expanded it on? Then why not mention it when you have the whole story?  When I edited it, all it said was that Bustamante was criticized for being in Mecha in the 70's but that's not really a controversy.  He's  famous I guess, but if you want to put that in the Mecha wiki, you should probably start a new entry titled "famous members of Mecha." Mosquito-001 14:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Por la raza... 

message: Wheatabix, post your reason for your tag placement or the tag will be removed. --hitssquad 14:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wheatabix's totallydisputed tag placement 

message: Just mentioning critics and then following up with an unverifiable controversial statement doesn't really bring much to the article.  I also deleted a mention of the "MeCHA constitution."  I don't doubt that a MeChA constitution somewhere on one of the hundreds of campuses that MeCHA is active has said what someone claims but which one?  I've already found a few MeCHA constitutions on various websites and they all seem to differ greatly.  Holding one up as the official not to be argued with constitution just because it might support your views of the organization doesn't seem very fair. Mosquito-001 22:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes citing what an organization actually has said itself to criticize it is totally unfair. We should only ever cite apologetic re-interpretations.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.53.210.99 (talk) 21:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Critics say..." 

message: I'm going to try to clean this article up, and hopefully solve the sources problem at the same time.  I could especially use help from someone who is particularly familiar with the early history/formation of the organization, as that section in particular could use some work to bring it up to encyclopedic standards, and I am not at this time very familiar with MEChA's prehistory.  TheKaplan 22:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you talking about my recent additions?--Rockero 22:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the information is neccesary and valuable but could be organized better--perhaps in a less narrative form.  I guess you might just be the "someone who is particularly familiar with the early history/formation of the organization" that I was talking about.  For now I'm not touching that section myself but rather focusing on the criticism aspect and on sourcing material in that and related sections. TheKaplan 23:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, now I've moved onto the formation part of the article.  I tried to edit it for style without touching the content.  I didn't change much, I guess what I really meant is that the opening "Throughout the 1960s, students organized to promote their own rights and the rights of Mexican Americans," and then the subsequent mentioning of all the groups without talking about MEChA untill much farther down, left the reader kind of wondering how it all relates back to MEChA, so I put that information right up front. TheKaplan 02:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I realize I wasn't explicit about the how MEChA was the result of this coalescence of students groups. I think that is clearer now.--Rockero 02:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul 

message: MEChA has no "standardized" logo. Most chapters do not use the "Hasta La Victoria, Siempre" slogan as their official motto, or use the Red Star. Therefore, I have removed the logo, as it is a misrepresentation of the organizations in question.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfraga (talk • contribs) 
:I agree with Bfraga. There are common elements to many MEChA symbols, but the graphic we had wasn't the best representation of "your average MEChA graphic", for the reasons he mentions.--Rockero 06:24, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The latest logo (Image:MEChALogo-291x257.gif) was better because it was more inline with logos I have commonly seen. Not sure about licensing issues, however, and the source isn't the best, either.--Rockero 00:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added a logo which does not contain a slogan or star for illustration purposes only. Perhaps someone would like to write a short description of the symbolism within the logo? --Bfraga 06:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo Removal

message: I think this article would definitely benefit from having the organization's logo pictured at the top.  I tried to add such a picture a while back but it was removed because it was, apparently, not representative of the average MEChA logo (apparently they vary slightly from chapter to chapter).  Lacking the requisite knowledge as to what constitutes the "average" MEChA logo, I invite those with that knowledge to add one.  I could just try to find another one and keep trying untill i get one that's acceptable, but that seems a little ineficient. TheKaplan 02:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe I have a logo which displays the one common feature of nearly all MEChA chapters, namely the Eagle holding a stick of dynamite and a maquahuitl. I will upload it and place it in the article. --Bfraga 05:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Logo added. --Bfraga 06:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Logo

message: In the criticism section of the article it makes mention of the phrase's roots, claim it originated during the Cuban Revolution, but I think it's roots may go back further than that. I noticed that the phrase bears a striking similarity to a quote of a fascist motto listed in the fascist mottos and quotes section of the wiki article on Italian Fascism. The quote roughly goes, "Everything inside the State, Nothing outside the State." Even in the "Por La Raza..." translations that translate "por" as "by" or "of," it does not reflect positively on Mecha. I'd provide a link to the article but I don't know how.
                        -Mike
:C'mon, I've been involved with several Mechistas and none of them were fascist or even slightly bordering on fascism. Anyway's that's original research. Ungovernable ForceThe Wiki Kitchen! 05:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All the MeCHA meetings I've been to never even mentioned WW2 or the state of politics then.  There were passing references to the 60's and reagan era latin american policy but that was it when it came to history.  Of course if someone were to connect Mecha with Nazism it would go over very well with the Rush Limbaughs of wikipedia.Mosquito-001 16:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What? since when do you have to mention WWII to be a fascist? Mecha has several key caracteristics of fascism: socialist ideas, racism, nacionalism, etc. Fascism is an ideology, and it didn't die with WWII. Dullfig 17:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the wikipedia article on fascism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism, MECHA doesn't seem to be a fascist organization.  Mecha is a liberal organization and believes strongly in fighting sexism within its ranks.  It even went so far as to require female/chicana representation at its national conventions.  The national conventions are also open to ideas from any Mecha chapter no matter the size.  It is not an authoritarian organization since its leadership is not really centralist in any form.  Every Mecha chapter is free to adapt itself to best serve the needs of the local community.  Fascism, as a philosophy, opposes socialism along with capitalist economics.  I don't know how to address this point of your's because it wasn't clearly stated.  Did you mean that mecha is anti-capitalist when you said socialist?  Racism is not a fascist idea. Racism is a practice unto itself.  Mecha's meetings are open to those of any race and their leadership is the same way.  Nationalist? Mecha's philosophy differs greatly from chapter to chapter but I've never seen a chapter wrap itself in patriotic imagery in order to fuel a political agenda but anything is possible.  I look forward to your counterpoint but I also recommend you read the wiki article on fascismMosquito-001 18:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I accept your point. So what would be a good description for a sesecionist, racist, anti-capitalist and anti-american organization? It's a good thing they are not sexist on top of that :)  Dullfig 23:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm just surprised you haven't linked it to al queda yet... :) Mosquito-001 01:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of Por La Raza 

message: I really don't think MeCHA as a whole is a nationalist organization.  Specific chapters might be but as a whole? no.  The goal of MeCHA is not to promote ethnocentrism but rather to improve the conditions of hispanic people without harming the living conditions of others. Mosquito-001 20:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputing category of Nationalism 

message: This article looks pretty decent right now, considering the controversial nature of its subject, and the extremist views of some of the people criticizing it.  My boyfriend is a Mechista, I have attended their meetings and gotten to know many of them.  I am white, and nothing they have said or done has ever even come close to seeming racist or separatist to me.  In my school Mecha is just another student group.  They do leadership training, social awareness programs, and social gatherings.  Pretty much what every other student group does.  I have always been welcomed with open arms by every member of Mecha.  They do not discriminate against any race, they are simply trying to empower an already underprivileged minority - and unlike white supremacist groups like the KKK, they equate "empowering" with academic opportunity, self-growth and solidarity; not with violently oppressing everyone different from them.  Anyone who is stupid and ignorant enough to compare these two groups is completely uneducated and sheltered.  As a side note, on our campus, the Catholic student group is constantly under fire because, unlike Mecha, they don't explicitly welcome non-Catholics (which is a requirement to get funding) - and their objectivity is further questioned by the fact that they represent a religious institution that, by and large, discriminates against LGBT people.  Yet the same loony right wing types who criticize Mecha on our campus are the exact people who insist the Catholic group should exist, get funding, and yet retain the right to deny membership to gays and non-Catholics.  Right wing hipocrisy as usual, and it would not suprise me in the least to discover that the critics who have spoken against Mecha here on Wikipedia have the same set of conflicting beliefs.  Anyway, despite the racist right wing nuts freaking out about an organization they're too lazy and paranoid to learn anything about in the first place, this article indeed is looking more and more fair-and-balanced (and I really do mean fair-and-balanced, not the Fox News kind of "fair-and-balanced" which is really just a euphemism for "we're lying to you"). - rglong
::I completely agree.  I'd also like to add that 99.9% of the people throwing crap at MeCHA have never attended even one MeCHA meeting.  These meetings are open to the public.  Leadership positions in MeCHA are also open to anyone no matter their race or ethnicity. Mosquito-001 02:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Too Shabby 

message: Criticism section needs work.  Critics of MEChA are not limited to conservative groups.  CNN (hardly right-wing) has referred to the group as a "Radical Hispanic separatist organization"
http://www.cnnheadlienews.com/2007/US/10/25/fire.mecha/index.html
The UK Times online has asserted that "MEChA supports 'reconquering' California for Mexico," referring to them as a radical group.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article901496.ece
Whether misguided statements, outright racism, or proper identification of the group, the fact is that non-"conservative" groups have criticized MEChA.Biccat (talk) 16:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you add a summary of those sources?  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 18:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a summary of the sources, and removed the reference to the SPLC's characterization of American Patrol, which is a topic for the page of that group, not for MEChA.  Including critics and cricism of the critics on this page leaves an impression of NPOV.Biccat (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine overall, but it turns out the CNN story was a fake. That's not a CNN website. (cnnheadlienews.com) I've deleted that portion, but the other edits are fine.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 19:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoa, my bad.  Thanks for noticing.  Strange that it showed up on google news.Biccat (talk) 14:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

text: The harshest criticism of Mecha included in this article (accusations of irredentism and supremacism) has come from American Patrol which has been labeled a hate group by the SPLC and ADL due to its association with white nationalist organizations like American Renaissance and individuals like Jared Taylor . Glenn  Spencer (the founder) has also been accused of making racist remarks, "The Mexican culture is based on deceit. Chicanos and Mexicanos lie as a means of survival." The source of the criticism is relevant to this topic and the fact that American Patrol has been labeled an extremist organization is very relevant and merits inclusion.MaryMay01 (talk) 12:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And yet statements from MEChA itself are ignored, such as
"the brutal 'gringo' invasion of our territories"
"We do not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent"
"Self-Defense against the occupying forces of the oppressors"Biccat (talk) 14:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

text: We need to integrate the criticism section into the whole article. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism Section

message: 1. Look into having an non-Mexican Latino translate the possible variations and nuances of the troublesome "raza" phrase.
2. Delete all unsigned comments immediately; yes, even my own.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.226.45 (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Two good steps to salvage this article

message: An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 17:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC 

message: Aztecs DID lived in Northern Mexico /Southern USA. They where among the Chichimeca tribes, they took their name when they finally settled in the Valley of Mexico. But as a people, they did lived there. Even they acknowledge their past habitats in their own nomadic life in the North,
--201.141.151.50 (talk) 08:36, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: it and the following paragraph are unsourced, making it sound weaselly and smack of WP:OR; considering being bold and remove it (part or all of the unsourced portion), or you can hold off & see if a further consensus develops here first... Boogerpatrol (talk) 13:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section has wrong data 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on MEChA. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://web.archive.org/web/20060619133531/http%3A//www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/michellemalkin/2003/08/20/168155.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050414004715/http://www.academia.org/campus_reports/2002/march_2002_3.html to http://www.academia.org/campus_reports/2002/march_2002_3.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040402010318/http://www.panam.edu/orgs/MEChA/aztlan.html to http://www.panam.edu/orgs/mecha/aztlan.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060727141920/http://www.dailybulletin.com/search/ci_3669573 to http://www.dailybulletin.com/search/ci_3669573
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:04, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on MEChA. 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/20081121233457/http://www.nationalmecha.org/documents/nationalConstitution.pdf to http://www.nationalmecha.org/documents/nationalConstitution.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100806213827/http://www.adl.org/98audit/campus.asp to http://www.adl.org/98audit/campus.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081121233457/http://www.nationalmecha.org/documents/nationalConstitution.pdf to http://www.nationalmecha.org/documents/nationalConstitution.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040531005733/http://www.panam.edu/orgs/mecha/st_barbara.html to http://www.panam.edu/orgs/mecha/st_barbara.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040229133031/http://www.stanfordreview.org/Archive/Volume_XXXI/Issue_2/News/news1.shtml to http://www.stanfordreview.org/Archive/Volume_XXXI/Issue_2/News/news1.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:19, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MEChA. 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/20091216151854/http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/mecha/archive/index_old.html to http://studentorgs.utexas.edu/mecha/archive/index_old.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:04, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified