Talk:British National Party/Archive 7

message: This looks like a very good article: I found out what I wanted to know.  But perhaps people should think about whether it is too long, and should be split up.  I make it about 9000 words, and the level of detail seems to me too great for an overview article.  See Wikipedia:Article_size for guidance. 131.111.8.98 11:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article too long? 

message: Does the BNP consider Mediterraneans as `white'? If the answer is yes then this would seem ironic considering that there are Med elements among Pakistanis and Indo-Aryans. I Assume `Indiginous Caucasians' woulsd exclude Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders who were British by ethnicity.  By the way, why was Sharon Ebanks really sacked?
*If you follow the reference link to the BNP constitution you will find the following:
1)  The British National Party represents the collective National, Environmental, Political,
Racial, Folkish, Social, Cultural, Religious and Economic interests of the indigenous
Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and Norse folk communities of Britain and those we regard as
closely related and ethnically assimilated or assimilable aboriginal members of the
European race also resident in Britain. Membership of the BNP is strictly defined
within the terms of, and our members also self define themselves within, the legal
ambit of a defined ‘racial group’ this being ‘Indigenous Caucasian’ and defined ‘ethnic
groups’ emanating from that Race as specified in law in the House of Lords case of
Mandla V Dowell Lee (1983) 1 ALL ER 1062, HL.
2) The indigenous British ethnic groups deriving from the class of ‘Indigenous
Caucasian’ consist of members of: i) The Anglo-Saxon Folk Community; ii) The Celtic
Scottish Folk Community; iii) The Scots-Northern Irish Folk Community; iv) The
Celtic Welsh Folk Community; v) The Celtic Irish Folk Community; vi) The Celtic
Cornish Folk Community; vii) The Anglo-Saxon-Celtic Folk Community; viii) The
Celtic-Norse Folk Community; ix) The Anglo-Saxon-Norse Folk Community; x) The
Anglo-Saxon-Indigenous European Folk Community; xi) Members of these ethnic
groups who reside either within or outside Europe but ethnically derive from them.
I think you can draw your own conclusions. Emeraude 12:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MEDITERRANEANS 

message: Someone put citation needed next to where I wrote that openly National Socialist groups dislike the BNP. This link is probably not admissable to wikipedia but proves that what I wrote is true. 
http://www.heretical.org/British/bnpfun.html
:I flagged the statement as needing a citation, and I'm not sure that site qualifies as a valid site to cite (if that makes sense).  In any case, you should add the citation to the article using the ref tag, rather than just removing the "fact" tag.  Have a look at WP:CITE for more information. --  JediLofty User ¦ Talk 22:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Too moderate

message: Given the absence of meaningful and specific criticisms of the article, I'll remove the NPOV tag tomorrow (in line with policy) - it's been there long enough.  I won't do this if specific criticisms with suggestions for changes are put forward before then.--Red Deathy 08:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV tag 

message: This refers to the introduction to the article, second paragraph. A couple of editors have persisted in adding the above phrases to quotations from original BNP source material.  One has said that he placed (non-white) in the sentence to give clarity. Maybe, but it still appears to be part of the genuine quotation. As to 'culturally assimilated', whether in brackets or not, this phrase nowehere appears in the BNP Consitution so its use is pure editorialising, not editing, and should be removed.  I have restored the article, in this respect, to its previous agreed and accepted form. It may be that some explanation for readers of the article is needed, but it cannot be done by adding words, even in parentheses, to quotations.  If it is felt that such explanation is needed (and personally I doubt it, but could be persuaded), then a more suitable method ought to be suggested here first. Emeraude 16:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Im back..sort of. anyway i read through the article, I cant see why anyone would have much wrong with it (nice to see the picture is updated). There will always be the far right saying its anti bnp and the far left who want to trash it or claim is pro-bnp or something, but for the mainstream its correct. Example is..bnp is far right to all but a few..therefore the statement is correct. Same thing about Hitler being dead to all but a few...theres a few who believe he is alive and well in some country but to most he is dead, and that he is called. Anyway in reply to what you posted in not sure who has been posting (ive been away), I will look at the article and see what..if anything i have a problem with (i doubt theres anything) :) Fethroesforia 21:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  (non-white) and (culturally assimilated) 

message: Why is this article longer than Conservative Party (UK)?
86.158.84.187 12:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because more volunteers worked on this article than the other one.  You are welcome to find sources and contribute/expand any article you so desire. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it not slightly disturbing that more people are willing to work on the BNP article than the Conservative one? Are the people contributing to this article BNP supporters? 86.158.84.187 15:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not disturbing at all. And your second question is ludicrous. Lurker (said · done) 16:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why is it ludicrous? The people who know enough about the BNP to write such a detailed article on them, is it unfair to assume they have something to do with the BNP? And why are they more willing to work on this article than that of a normal political party?
* Think about it a bit mate.  You've got a fair point in my mind that the article is too long. I think it is too.  But there's no reason why someone should i/ be a BNP member to know about the BNP (after all a Historian might know about Hitler but that doesnt make him a Nazi)  and ii/ maybe this one isnt too long but other articles are too short?  All the best.  Marcus22 19:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It also needs to be long because its controversial, and has to be scrupulously neutral, so I's are dotted and T's crossed.--Red Deathy 17:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can I ask a serious question? 

message: I think it is appropriate to put that the National Socialist British People Party, which bases its policies on the doctrine of Hitler's party and wishes to create a parallel in Britian, as well as a skinhead group in B&H and an orthodox NS or Nazi group in the N9S consider them too moderate. The last paragraph of the introduction refers to how the rest of British society views seem and it is worth not only noting what those to the "left" of them think but also what those to the "right" do.
Please sign your comments.  Marcus22 19:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: perception of the BNP from the Far Right or Fascist realm

message: Not sure how to do that, can someone please archive this page and open a fresh one?  This page is already 81kb long.  Marcus22 10:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time for an archive