Talk:Danish Free Press Society: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
WP DK importance = low
Tag: 2017 wikitext editor
"non-partisan": new section
 
Line 13: Line 13:


:I don't understand this comment, as I have stated '''four''' times directly in the article something about its "criticism of Islam", Hedegaard's controversial "writings on Islam", reprinting of "Muhammad cartoons", and two prominent members leaving the group due to Hedegaard's "comments on Muslims". [[User:Thismess|Thismess]] ([[User talk:Thismess|talk]]) 22:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
:I don't understand this comment, as I have stated '''four''' times directly in the article something about its "criticism of Islam", Hedegaard's controversial "writings on Islam", reprinting of "Muhammad cartoons", and two prominent members leaving the group due to Hedegaard's "comments on Muslims". [[User:Thismess|Thismess]] ([[User talk:Thismess|talk]]) 22:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

== "non-partisan" ==

The statement that the Society is "non-partisan" in the led appears not to be supported by the source cited. It seems (via Google Translate) to be instead making a much narrower claim: that the Society ''describes itself'' as "a cross-political association". We should not be asserting self-description as objective fact. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 14:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:06, 19 July 2024

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nice work, thank you. However the article seems to be missing or emphasizing that this organization tends to be seen as right-wing/emphasizing specifically freedom to criticize Islam, which all of the sources mention.

Rusalkii (talk) 21:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand this comment, as I have stated four times directly in the article something about its "criticism of Islam", Hedegaard's controversial "writings on Islam", reprinting of "Muhammad cartoons", and two prominent members leaving the group due to Hedegaard's "comments on Muslims". Thismess (talk) 22:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"non-partisan"

The statement that the Society is "non-partisan" in the led appears not to be supported by the source cited. It seems (via Google Translate) to be instead making a much narrower claim: that the Society describes itself as "a cross-political association". We should not be asserting self-description as objective fact. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]