Talk:Slovak Togetherness
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Kandidovala ako súčasť slovenskej ľudovej strany.
Diskusia bola na fóre národného pozorovateľa.
The issue here is not one of the Spectator being a reliable source or not, it's about WP:WORDS which says that words like extremist are "inherently non-neutral, so they should not be used as unqualified labels in the voice of the article. If a reliable source describes a person or group using one of these words, then the word can be used but the description must be attributed in the article text to its source, preferably by direct quotation, and always with a verifiable citation. If the term is used with a clear meaning by multiple reliable independent sources, then citations to several such sources should be provided for the sentence where it appears." In other words we cannot say "x is an extremist" but "x is considered to be extremist by source A." The Slovak spectator also doesn't say anything about the local population being extremist so that'll have to go as unsourced POV. Valenciano (talk) 14:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification, I couldn't imagine what the issue could possibly be as the cited article used "extremist group" in it's title for simple identification. And in your ES you mentioned reliable source so I guessed the "reliable-ness" was the issue. [1]. Hobartimus (talk) 15:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ah sorry for not being clear. My issue was generally one of NPOV - per policy that we should let readers make up their own minds, rather than leading them. So rather than saying that the Slovak Brotherhood are a bunch of nutty nazi extremists we just state what they have and haven't done and said. Valenciano (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)