Talk:Stormfront (website)

'Engineering and technology'?

Why was this article classified as an 'Engineering and technology good article'? It's a website, yes, but surely the medium is secondary to the content. – SJL 03:05, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah, I was wondering about that too. Are all websites in "engineering and technology"? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 05:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I nominated it under "Computing" because that's where WP:GAN says websites should go. It's currently listed in "Websites and the Internet" in the Engineering/Tech section of WP:GA.

Some of the following might be better:

From "Social sciences and society":

• Cultural phenomena, movements and subcultures
• Internet culture
• Organizations

"Politics and government":

• Political parties and movements

It looks like some websites (Wikipedia, Youtube, Citizendium) are in "Internet culture", while the rest are in "Websites and the Internet". Skomorokh 11:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I think this might fit best as "cultural phenomena". That it's a website is pretty much the least notable aspect of Stormfront. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you think the article ought to be moved from Stormfront (website) then? To Stormfront.org or Stormfront White Nationalist Community perhaps? Skomorokh 15:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Either of those might make sense. The longer one is probably better, since it's their official name. Of course, people looking for it are simply going to type "Stormfront" and get to the disambiguation page. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

White supremacy?

The forum is labeled "white supremacist" when in fact, the forum is white nationalist. They do not state that the white race is superior, but they do endorse a white-only nation. 129.71.73.243 (talk) 01:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Q.E.D. Jayjg ^(talk) 04:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)}}

See prior discussions at Talk:Stormfront_(website)/Archive_6#Neutrality, etc. Sceptre has been blocked. John Nevard (talk) 11:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the OP, but the sources don't. End of story. the skomorokh 13:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

This news just in

Stormfront have enabled mandatory registration in order to view the forum after a massive traffic overload after Obama was elected. I don't have an account, so I don't know what's going on there, but I think it's very, very bad. Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 07:21, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, any coverage in the media/blogosphere? the skomorokh 20:27, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't on the news. I don't think it experienced more traffic after Obama's win. If it did I'd think Don Imus would want it. I've seen it after Obama's election. They seem to be arguing he's successful because he's "part white" YVNP (talk) 20:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Straws; clutching at... what a hoot! So the above is entirely unsourced? -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 04:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, see this:

"One of the most popular white supremacist Web sites got more than 2,000 new members the day after the election, compared with 91 new members on Election Day, according to an AP count. The site, stormfront.org, was temporarily off-line Nov. 5 because of the overwhelming amount of activity it received after Election Day. On Saturday, one Stormfront poster, identified as Dalderian Germanicus, of North Las Vegas, said, 'I want the SOB laid out in a box to see how 'messiahs' come to rest. God has abandoned us, this country is doomed.'"

So though I'm not sure about the registration thing, activity did apparently jump after the election. --V2Blast (talk) 23:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I checked the site and it's open again. If someone wants to add the material from the Yahoo news page that'd be appropriate. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:21, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

And it's closed again. It's apparently intermittent. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 06:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice work chaps, I've added it to the History section. Regards, the skomorokh 13:55, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

'The new Ku Klux Klan'?

Interesting stuff, this. -- Nevard 00:28, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Interesting stuff indeed, but I have to ask in light of this fatherly advice:

“ Do not you ever say, you can not say." Shake and try to stop the hand with the speech: "You know that you can not say." The father remains motionless: "Do not ever say to an American journalist, but you know that is true. ” — Il Duce Grandi Wizardi Don Black

...are machine translations from Repubblica reliable enough for our purposes?! the skomorokh 13:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely not. I'm not even going to try and parse that by hand. Could be worth having someone who can read it fluently look over it. -- Nevard 14:01, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, there's another machine translation here. I'm having a go at finding someone who could provide some decent insight. -- Nevard 11:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

And I've asked an editor fluent in the language to do a translation. "I asked them if Stormfront is not just another new Ku Klux Klan, a Klan of the 21st Century without pointed hoods and Arian symbols. "Yes, it is just like that", was the instant response. Along with Don Black, his son Dereck (age 19) is seated, who is the organizer of the radio (program) on the Internet of Stormfront. From the beginning of our encounter he listened quietely, but now interrupts his father: "You have not never said it, you can not say that". He gestured and tried to stop his father's speaking with his hand: " You know that you can't say it". The father remained immovable: " I never said that an American journalist, but you know that it is true"." Nevard (talk) 06:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm quite uncomfortable with including this in the article given the current state of play; your translation does not make grammatical sense in English as far as I can make out, and a misplaced conjunction could radically alter the meaning of the passage. From an encyclopaedian point of view, I would love to write that Black envisages Stormfront as the new KKK, but we can't trust this source for such an outrageous claim - what if the media picked it up from Wikipedia and it turned out to be a misunderstanding? Egg on our faces. I had a brief look around the Stormfront forums but I couldn't find anything dealing with this report specifically, although this comment casts serious doubt as to the journalistic reliability of the article we have just included. the skomorokh 15:26, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I didn't ask for perfection- just wanted to check that I wasn't reading the article wrong. I think it is reasonable to believe I am not reading the article wrong, and that Dereck Black was not interrupting his father to stop him expanding on the subject of how Stormfront could not be thought of as the new KKK, and Don Black was not pointing out that he had sometimes failed to explain his pluralist view on life to the American media.

Obviously, we're not going to be mining that source for a 'typical Stormfront quote' in the lede any time soon. Nevard (talk) 15:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree; the potential for misinterpretation here is too great for this content to be included responsibly. Skomorokh 10:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

"Neo-Nazi" again

This article has been added to the category ‹The template Category link is being considered for merging.› Category:Neo-Nazi websites. As the only identification of Stormfront as "Neo-Nazi" is Bill O'Reilly, who is not a neutral and reliable source of information, this category does not belong in the article in its current state. Per WP:BURDEN, I'll remove it tomorrow if this state persists. Skomorokh 20:47, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I think we should include the category, based on the arguments on OrangeMarlin's talk page. Thanks, SqueakBox 21:19, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

There are many sources that have called the website "neo-nazi". Among others are the Village Voice.[1], The Jewish Journal,[2] and the district government of Dusseldorf.[3] I'm sure there are plenty more. Further, they have a history of posting nazi-related graphics in sysop-controlled pages. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:41, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

The Register article refers to Stormfront.com, a different website. I'm not familiar with the other two publications; are they reliable sources? For a designation of such weight, it would be much better to have more than a passing mention (see white supremacy discussion and footnote). Appreciate the research, Skomorokh 02:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The Register article is a great example of their incompetence. German sources do, indeed, describe Stormfront.org as a Nazi/Neo-Nazi website that the Dusseldorf government has banned.[4] Nevard (talk) 05:12, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I wonder what the folks at http://www.stormfront.com/ think about their namesake. That must lead to some confusion. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 06:20, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

• A SICK Nazi website has unleashed a tirade of hate at Irish Olympic boxing hero Darren Sutherland. The 26-year-old bronze medallist, whose dad is from the Caribbean, has been labelled a "mongrel" and "half-breed" by brainless racists on the Stormfront website.
  • "Darren's targeted by nazis" Danny Conlon. News of the World. London (UK): Aug 24, 2008. pg. 7
• In recent months Black has toned down the Web site, banning many symbols of Nazism that formerly were common on the site, including swastikas, lightning bolts and the number 88. The letter H is the eighth letter of the alphabet, and among supremacists 88 stands for "Heil, Hitler." He also eliminated the N-word, Potok notes. According to Kreis of Aryan Nations, Black has not explained why he did so, "but he has ticked off a lot of people" in white power circles. Potok says he believes the changes are purely cosmetic. "This is not a change of philosophy on Black's part," Potok said. "This is a public relations move to make the Web site seem less drastic, to try and draw more people in right now during the presidential campaign. His beliefs are still fundamentally neo-Nazi. If you listen to the content, you'll hear it."
  • "LOCAL ORGANIZER, OTHER SUPREMACISTS SAY OBAMA'S RUN BOOSTS THEIR CAUSE" JOHN LANTIGUA. Palm Beach Post. West Palm Beach, Fla.: Jul 27, 2008. pg. A.1
• Mr. Warman continued to scour the Internet for Canadian hatemongers, finding many at a U.S. neo-Nazi site called Stormfront, whose web forum has a Canadian section. "It's almost like moths to a flame," he says. "They can't avoid it."
  • "One man's war on Internet hate; He calls himself more 'Aryan' than the hatemongers he chases, but Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman has become the bete noire of Canada's neo-Nazis, writes Don Butler.;" Don Butler. The Ottawa Citizen. Ottawa, Ont.: Jul 11, 2007. pg. A.1
• Held for bail hearing. Ile Perrot man visited neo-Nazi websites, posted photos with guns...At other websites, Emard posted photos of himself posing with weapons and making a salute used by the Nazis in Germany before and during the Second World War. He is believed to have posted comments at www.stormfront.org more than 300 times since October 2005.
  • "Threats suspect fond of hate sites:; [Final Edition]" PAUL CHERRY and MICHELLE LALONDE. The Gazette. Montreal, Que.: Oct 7, 2006. pg. A.9
• Text of report by Belgrade-based B-92 TV on 22 February
• [Presenter] A list of Jews living in Serbia has appeared on a US Nazi site, in its forum in Serbian.
• [Reporter] Participants in the forum on the stormfront.org site say only a dead Jew is a good Jew.
  • "List of Jews living in Serbia appears on US Nazi site" BBC Monitoring European. London: Feb 23, 2005. pg. 1

These are just a few of the sources I've found in Proquest. There are numerous reliable sources that label this a "nazi" or "neo-nazi" site. While we certainly should be cautious in suing such a label, it appears well-justified in this case. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 06:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)