Jump to content

Template talk:LaRouche movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SineBot (talk | contribs) at 00:25, 15 April 2010 (Signing comment by Know your cuts of meat - "→‎Split off section for those separated from the movement: "). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Mediation, arbitration,
requests for clarification, and
other discussions about the
LaRouche movement, 2004-2008
Long term abuse subpage, LaRouche accounts
ArbCom clarification/enforcement,
AN/I, 2005-8
Arbitration 2006
Arbitration 2005
Arbitration 2004
Mediation 2006 and 2007
Mediation 2004
Article talk 2004-2007
Template talk
Categories
This box:

Critics

We have Category:Critics of the LaRouche Movement. Is there any reaons we shouldn't include those names in the tamplate too?   Will Beback  talk  21:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:Can you cite examples of other templates that include those sorts of entries? --Leatherstocking (talk) 01:06, 24 October 2009 (UTC);[reply]
Template:Sathya Sai Baba.   Will Beback  talk  01:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Aum Shinrikyo   Will Beback  talk  01:39, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:Can you cite something more comparable, such as a BLP or a political movement? --Leatherstocking (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC);[reply]
Those are comparable. The "LaRouche movement" isn't a BLP, though it includes BLPs. If there's no objection I'll go ahead and add it.   Will Beback  talk  19:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:::I have looked at templates for groups that are more similar to the LaRouche movement, including Template:Nation of Islam and Template:Ralph Nader, and found no such feature. Do you feel that readers of the LaRouche articles may have trouble finding the criticism? That seems unlikely.--Leatherstocking (talk) 00:51, 25 October 2009 (UTC);[reply]
The difference is that there is no "Category:Critics of Ralph Nader" or "Category:Critics of Nation of Islam". Any logical reason to leave it out of this template?   Will Beback  talk  04:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:::::Well, to pursue this reasoning further, I see that there is a "Category:Critics of Objectivism," which does not appear on Template:Objectivism. There doesn't seem to be a consistent standard we can refer to here. Again, do you think readers have difficulty locating the criticism in the LaRouche articles? It seems to me that it is always conveniently placed for maximum emphasis. --Leatherstocking (talk) 06:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC);[reply]
BTW, there is no " Template:Objectivism".   Will Beback  talk  19:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If we include members then it only seems to be neutral to include critics as well.   Will Beback  talk  06:14, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
:::::::But in addition to members, you have Jeremiah Duggan and Roy Frankhouser, non-members who are included in the "people" section in order to link to various accusations against LaRouche. The template as it stands seems to be pretty standard. Maybe you should start a discussion at Category talk:United States political leader templates.--Leatherstocking (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC);[reply]

Postings by sock of banned user struck-through.   Will Beback  talk  04:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since there doesn't appear to be any reasons not to do so I'll go ahead and add it.   Will Beback  talk  17:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Split off section for those separated from the movement

Curious about David P. Goldman, I took a look at his article and noticed the "LaRouche movement" box at the bottom. He's a former member of that group, but left (or was just kicked out), and it seemed unfair to imply, as this template seemed to do, that he's some kind of a current member. That also seems to be a BLP problem. So I looked at the articles for others listed in that "People" section and found a total of four that seem to be no longer part of the LaRouche movement and put them all in the separate section. Listing them in a simple "People" section would be a bit like putting Whittaker Chambers, James Burnham and The God that Failed writers in a "Communist movement" template and placing that at the bottom of each article. It's just misleading. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 04:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC) One other thing: I called the new section "People separated from the movement", which isn't very graceful wording. Perhaps "Former members" might be a better title, but I thought some readers might confuse that with deceased members. If someone wants to change it to "Former members" or something else, please feel free. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 04:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You also have Roy Frankhouser and Jeremiah Duggan who were never members of the group, but got on the template by virtue of being "linked" to it in the press. Actually, Gunnarson fits that description also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Know your cuts of meat (talk • contribs) 00:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:LaRouche_movement&oldid=356075305"