Talk:Barbara Lerner Spectre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 13 April 2016. The result of the discussion was withdrawn. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Barbara Lerner Spectre quote from Israel Broadcasting Authority video
Here is a note I received from Lukeno94 on Dec. 13, 2013 about my adding the quote from BLS from the Israel Broadcasting Authority video, The Jews of Sweden: "This is your last warning. The next time you add defamatory content, as you did at Barbara Lerner Spectre, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Lukeno94" Firstly, I documented that BLS said those words on the Israel Broadcasting Authority video, The Jews of Sweden. Secondly, if you Google BLS you will find most of the first pages results allude to this quote. How is it defamatory to accurately quote someone about something they said that is generating a lot or most of the current interest in her? What am I missing? Or what is Lukeno94 missing? JeffLB (talk) 17:54, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.46.7.104 (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
- It's pretty simple, and it's something I've said in the edit summaries you must've read; this is neither a notable event, nor is it a subject compliant with WP:NPOV, WP:UNDUE or WP:BLP. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 21:38, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
- Well Lukeno94, you in effect raise four objections and I'd like to respond to each of them. First objection: "not a notable event". BLS made a proclamation on a public program produced by the Israel Broadcasting Authority concerning the future of Europe and in particular the part Jews would play in bringing this future about. BLS is an accomplished woman who headed a prestigious organization and who said this on a respected television program. Many or most of the people who come to this page do indeed believe this is a notable event, for better or worse, or they wouldn't have come to this page to find out more about BLS. In the last 90 days this page has had 3,062 visits and considering Google search history, we can be reasonably confident that many or most of the visitors to this page have come because of their (positive or negative) reaction to this "event". Second objection: this quote is not a NPOV. I don't know how to even respond to that, other than to say that BLS said it and that is what has generated interest in her, whether positive or negative. The words were spoken in a very public way where BLS knew many people would see her actually speaking them in the program and she decided to say them. Thus quoting her is hardly promoting a POV or defamatory. Third objection: not meeting standards for articles about living persons. The words are verifiable and verified. They are significant. And fourth objection, that the words are given undue weight. The fact that many or most people are apparently coming to this page in itself gives the words a certain weight and significance. Where is the question of undue weight? I have carefully considered your objections, Lukeno94, and this is why I don't feel they justify deleting this quote. And by the way, I am Jewish and do not believe that this quote by BLS, however I feel about it, is defamatory against my relatives and fellow Jews, which I infer, perhaps incorrectly, that you believe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeffLB (talk • contribs) 22:56, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
- You're missing nothing. You documented it and the quote is not vandalization. Citing that quote is not taking sides in the debate. It was said. It's big on the internet. Naturally a Wikipedia article should mention it. You need to ignore people who threaten you like that. The guy is full of BS saying things like "I'll get you blocked" and, "The quote isn't notable." You really just have to laugh in pity at them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannibalcaesar (talk • contribs) 22:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Problems with this article
I don't see how this person has sufficient notability to warrant an encyclopedia entry. It seems the woman is 'notable' only for a brief 2010 television appearance in which she attributed increased antisemitism in Sweden to Jewish advocacy of multiculturalism; if you enter her name in a search engine all of the results returned refer to this alone and are mostly from fringe right and/or antisemitic blogs, where she is derided as a hypocrite for advocating multiculturalism in Europe while opposing it in Israel. Ironically, after a long edit war, there is currently no reference to the controversial remarks for which she is in anyway 'notable' in the first place.
The article was created about a year after Spectre's television appearance by a user named "israsport", an apparent portmanteau of "Israel" and "sport", who appears to have created an account on Wikipedia solely for the purpose of creating this article, leaving the site shortly thereafter. It appears the article was created for mischievous rather than informative purposes. CannotFindAName (talk) 17:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
- Your last paragraph seems to be unnecessary speculation. Anyway, WP:AFD is the place to argue that the article should be deleted. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
- Where is the reference for her biography?
Citizenship
What are her citizenships beside the Swedish one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:4942:47D0:388F:4203:BE60:ACC5 (talk) 16:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- Why is the citizenship of BLS still not mentioned anywhere in the article? With each person in Wikipedia articles, a person's citizenship is mentioned at least somewhere within the article. Especially as an academic person founding her own academic institution abroad wich still seems to be existing, there is no trace of citizenship mentioned. This question arising is fully justified in an article about a person on Wikipedia. Or is there a valid reason not to publish of which country she is a passport holder? So, to get this straight: 1. born in the U.S.: U.S. citizenship rather likely, unless parents insisted on a different inherited one (ius sanguinis); 2. emigrated to Sweden: Sweden permits dual citizenship, so does the U.S., means Swedish citizenship possible; 3. currently living in Israel: Is BLS just living there, like a retiree living abroad in a warmer climate, or did she immigrate there? Israel does permit dual citizenship. If she holds all three passports, she would be a triple citizenship holder (??) - so, how to write the first phrase? "Barbara Lerner Spectre (born 1942) is a Swedish academic[1] and philosophy lecturer,"?, as the only hint within the article is the explicit statement of her immigration to Sweden. This academic lecturer and academy founder is not a Martian, is she.
Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2015
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi. Please note that the "official" web page that is listed here under "External links" was created by an impersonator, which together with two different twitter accounts in Barbara Spectre's name aimed at fueling hate towards her. They have since been reported and removed. 213.64.141.95 (talk) 09:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Paideia organization
On their website, the organization explains itself as "Paideia - The European Institute for Jewish Studies in Sweden is a non-denominational academic framework". Is Paideia state accredited as a private school, a university or what exactly? Is it "accredited in Europe" (the EU) or just in Sweden? Are their graduate degrees officially recognized, if yes, in which European countries? The status of this facility remains unclear. Official explanation from Swedish authorities would clear the matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:46:1A08:5256:7182:CDEA:312B:C8E (talk) 11:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- Paideia seems to be an anti-scientific organisation of ideologists... At least, there seems to be no documented scientific work. --188.105.162.235 (talk) 03:08, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
About few recent edits
Although it seems to be a well documented fact what Barbara Lerner Spectre said in one video interview, Brustopher has repeatedly removed the quote, claiming that "The whole thing is sourced to a book by a fringe nutter that's why" and also insulting an other fellow wiki editor saying that his "contribution history is stereotypically hilarious". I don't need to touch the possible fringe nuttery of a book author, because the quote is a widely documented fact. It is just such an (in)famous quote that it could be found on at least that one book, written by a "fringe nutter" as Brustopher calls him. Even if you got Youtube somehow wipe out all those video clips, there are many copies on other sites. If Brustopher or anyone keeps doing such deletions, I would call that vandalism. Until now, we could say that Brustopher did not know about the wide documentation, but the other possible explanation could be that Brustopher was motivated by a political agenda. I don't wish to see any kind of deletion vandalism and expect good will. I am sure that also the long time experienced wiki editor Brustopher understands this. ––Nikolas Ojala (talk) 23:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
- My Dearest Nikolas. I am sorry to hear that you believe I am vandalising this article. I'd like to note that before you commented on this talk page you had not once made a reasoned argument for why this quote should be included. You had merely wrote "Why remove such a fine quote?" As for Jim Red you are right. I apologise for making fun of his fetish for far right politics. One should not insult their dear comrades in wikipedia editing. But he didn't give any reason for reverting either, he just removed it.
- As for my reasoning, the issue is not whether Mrs Spectre said the above quote. It is instead, whether there is enough reliable coverage in our sources to draw attention to the anti-semitic conspiracy theorists who've ran wild with it, and present it as proof that there's a Jewish conspiracy to take over Europe. We have a lot of guidance on this in our Biography of Living Persons policy, for instance:
Many Wikipedia articles contain material on people who are not well known, even if they are notable enough for their own article. In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources.
andIf an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article – even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out.
- So what source do we have. A youtube video that's been watched a lot, and a book by a guy ranting about a secret Jewish agenda. Is that enough to include this "controversy." No. We need some serious coverage from serious sources. As for your further addition about her wanting to wipe out the white race, you're going to need much stronger sourcing for that.
- I wish you all the best my dear comrade in editing, on the most holy day of Shabbat tommorow. ;) Brustopher (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
- Check google search history and you'll see the single reason for searching this woman is that quote. Nothing else comes close. So... there's that. 31.208.86.150 (talk) 16:33, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
