Talk:Thomas Sewell (neo-Nazi)/Archive 1

  Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-14/neo-nazi-thomas-sewell-arrested-melbourne/100140902. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. MaxnaCarta (talk) 03:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

...seems to go to the wrong Grampians. 43.225.61.171 (talk) 06:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Apparently the person who wrote the above knows what happened, given he hasn't been tried yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:1D4:5600:6145:4121:3C32:EE59 (talk) 08:34, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

The material is well sourced and has been referenced. Just because you don't like reality doesn't make it so. AlanS^talk 06:03, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Why does this person have their own article. Who next? A bikie gang leader? 106.69.12.92 (talk) 15:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

In paragraph 4 of opening section user AlanS is inserting opinioniated slander using wording that does not appear in the sourced article. His changes have been reverted on numerous occasions by other users also. 103.210.25.80 (talk) 06:59, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

The use of the term grooming is appropriate as sections of the media have used it here to refer to the indoctrination of children into far-right ideologies. Additionally refer to here. I'll add in additional content. AlanS^talk 08:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

You are using an unreliable source for your comment. I have removed it as per BLP. Please familiarise yourself with our sourcing policy for WP:BLP --Pete (talk) 09:52, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Ah yes, another case of anything Skyring doesn't like is an unreliable source. I believe we've been here before. AlanS^talk 10:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Skyring is correct, the fact you are so persistent about incorrectly using the word 'grooming' shows your bias, especially when multiple other users have shown you why you are wrong. You very clearly don't like the person this article is about and you should refrain from editing articles where you cant be neutral when doing so. Korora (talk) 16:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

You ought not cast baseless aspersions. I've provided reliable source to substantiate my good faith edits. AlanS^talk 23:59, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Cut the lies Alan. We can all tell you are being emotional and its causing bias in your edits. You don't like Thomas Sowell so you're trying to slander him. 103.210.25.80 (talk) 06:40, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

You need to cease the discourteous and baseless personal attacks or you'll find yourself before AN/I. AlanS^talk 06:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Avoid editing articles about politics, for the benefit of the greater wikipedia community and the public 103.210.25.80 (talk) 16:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

You're not doing yourself any favours here by continuing to caste discourteous and baseless aspersions. In your own interests I suggest you cease. AlanS^talk 23:44, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

If it was a left wing political event (such as a climate change protest, walk out, or whatnot organized by adults) with a child present I don't believe anyone would find it appropriate to label as grooming, in order to keep a neutral POV we either need to label both as grooming or neither and given I can't see any examples of the reverse being true, keep biased language out of it. TheProfessionalNamer (talk) 02:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the paragraph pending consensus here. It isn't mentioned in the body of the article - such as it is - so why put it in the lede, which is meant to be a summary of the whole? The supporting article is very light on details and I don't think it carries enough weight for us to go kicking this guuy in the guts with it. Was he convicted of grooming or anything inappropriate to do with a child? No.

Not that I am keen to give this snake a free pass but we do have to follow policy.

Thoughts regarding BLP? --Pete (talk) 03:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Point taken about having content in the lead that is not in the body. I have put it in the body. I presume this is acceptable. AlanS^talk 04:11, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you familiarize yourself with the definition of grooming, Cambridge defines it as "the criminal activity of becoming friends with a child in order to try to persuade the child to have a sexual relationship", this is not taking place (obviously) so it would be a slanderous accusation regardless of whatever (blatantly biased) news source you bring up suggesting it is the case by distorting the meaning of the word. TheProfessionalNamer (talk) 04:21, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@TheProfessionalNamer, since it become obvious previous that consensus was against inclusion of the term I haven't edited to re-include it so I'm confused why you're bringing it up? AlanS^talk 04:31, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

The fact you're so stubborn and it took 5 different people to explain why you were wrong shows your bias and why you should avoid editing political articles as you clearly struggle to understand why a neutral POV is so important. 103.210.25.80 (talk) 05:22, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Once again, cease with your personal attacks and aspersion casting. AlanS^talk 05:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I was under the impression you were going to reinstate the previous wording of calling them "groomers", you clearly did not do this, the new wording you added (before it was reversed) I don't find particularly relevant information for the page although I don't think it's that big of an issue neutrality wise at it seemed rather neutral to me. TheProfessionalNamer (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I've subsequently edited to include more sources. AlanS^talk 04:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any connection with the subject of the article and the child beyond the fact that they attended the same event. I'm not seeing the journalist make a link, I'm not seeing these "experts and pundits" making the link. I'm only seeing one person doing this - you, buddy, and you've been strongly criticised here already - and I don't think that we in Wikivoice should say that this guy is grooming or indocrinating children based on such flimsy links. This is something that needs a solid consensus. Be warned, any attempt to restore this material without consensus and I'll report you. I stongly suggest that you discuss the exact wording you want and explain how it is supported by the sources quoted, because I am not seeing it. --Pete (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

You should be careful about supporting criticism which takes the form of aspersion casting and personal attacks Skyring. As per use of the term "grooming" the material you removed did not include that and you well know it. Do not presume to warn me when you are engaged in edit warring. AlanS^talk 07:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

As warned, I've taken this to the next step with a report here. You are invited to present your views there. --Pete (talk) 07:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@User:Skyring the following source which was from an undercover journalistic investigation contains the following "Sewell wants network members to indoctrinate their wives, girlfriends and children, but even he recognises that this will require keeping secrets from them." Network refers to the Nationalist Socialist Network which Sewell is the leader of. I'm not proposing this be inserted word for word anywhere into the article for obvious reasons, the question I put to you is do you find this acceptable as the basis for writing content about Sewell seeking to indoctrinating the family members, including children, of his followers? I'm not proposing a lot of content.

You was never a Catholic, I take it? --Pete (talk) 09:42, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

I hope you're not proposing that Catholicism is an hateful, extremist ideology? Ps, no. AlanS^talk 09:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

You headed this section, Indoctrination of family members, remember? --Pete (talk) 16:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

AlanS should be forbidden from editing this article for a set peroid of time. The level of bias is disgraceful. 103.210.25.80 (talk) 18:53, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Your continued personal attacks are noted and reflect on you more than anyone else. You should cease. AlanS^talk 23:50, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

The heading is what I thought of at the time. It doesn't need to be something that goes into the article. If we ended up agreeing on only a sentence then that would not be something we would need a heading for. AlanS^talk 06:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Pete, do you have any comments on the substance of what I what I was discussing? AlanS^talk 06:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I removed some vandalism in the article which was just essentially calling the guy a doodie-head (as if that is supposed to be more insulting to most people than being called a nazi), but there may be other vandalism on the page, it would be nice if someone familiar with the subject give the article a quick glance....

Also, the final paragraph of the "Activities" section seems unnecessary and possibly just equates to Wikipedia serving as a directory since the entire purpose of the sentence is to link to his telegram channel. I'm leaving it because I'm uncertain if it should be there and I'm generally in favor of including all details even minutiae, but this seems out of place.2600:6C56:6100:46E:C512:2D8B:787:3DE3 (talk) 02:46, 19 June 2022 (UTC) Garymericanoaintgotnowikipediaaccount

Removed telegram link as mentioned above, adding a link to a news site that mentions they use telegram, as opposed to directing users to the personal telegram.

I've also removed all mentions of European Mens Movement or whatever nonsense, it wasn't referenced in any article, replaced with Nationals Socialist Network, which is already referenced on a wikipedia page National Socialist Network. Charmanderpants (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't the person who had put the material in there but doing a quick google on the term "European Australian Movement" I quickly found an article by the ABC^[1] which refers to Sewell as its leader. You should conduct basic research before unnecessarily editing articles. AlanS^talk 06:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC) AlanS^talk 06:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't mean to imply you did, I was just responding in the thread. As for EAM I removed it because it was not cited in the article. It's not our responsibility to find citations for other users contributions. Charmanderpants (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Jacob Hersant is the official leader of the NSN as far as I know, the European Australia Movement which is headed by Sewell runs all their fitness and fighting stuff where as the NSN does all their banner drops and stickers. I suggest doing research before removing things for no reason TheProfessionalNamer (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I'd suggest you take your own advice instead of engaging in oringal research. It is well referenced that Sewell is leader of both. Refer to the link I provided above or just do a google on "Natoinalist Socialist Network". AlanS^talk 05:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, Hersant was the original founder of NSN, and Tom the EAM, but due to Hersant's bail conditions, Sewell appears to be the effective leader of NSN at this point in time. TheProfessionalNamer (talk) 02:25, 12 July 2023 (UTC)