Jump to content

Talk:European Australian Movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reverts (or: How to make this draft better)

[edit]

@Vuurkrag: I oppose the addition of certain unsourced information. I want this draft to be better, and your revert of my removal made it worse than I had made it. Since you are the originator of this unsourced content, the WP:BURDEN and WP:ONUS are on you. Despite this being a draft, it must also not include original research. —Alalch E. 15:58, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft undeleted

[edit]

Curtesy ping to @Meow1111xd, @Vuurkrag and @Alalch E. as previous contributors to this article. I've gotten this draft undeleted.

A simple google search indicates that the group are notable. It just needs the content that's in the article to be referenced. TarnishedPathtalk 11:59, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]

Moved to mainspace by TarnishedPath (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

TarnishedPathtalk 09:50, 9 June 2025 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: No - n
  • Other problems: No - A mere mission statement is not interesting. Even so, this claim seems rather ordinary for a Neo-Nazi organization. I believe more content should be added to this article so that more interesting information can be found.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: I would recommend you first build up information about the organization's history, its beliefs, and its activities before adding claims to the infobox. Also, the image of the flag is most likely copyrighted in Australia, so it should be hosted locally on enwiki. ―Howard🌽33 13:59, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Howardcorn33 I've removed the flag and the predecessors stuff from the infobox. Does that resolve most of the points above aside from the subjective opinion that the hook is not interesting?TarnishedPathtalk 14:29, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TarnishedPath: "Anti-LGBT," "Antisemitism," "Ecofascism" should be discussed in the article body itself. The year of formation is also uncited. ―Howard🌽33 14:38, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Howardcorn33 fixed. Per the interesting part, I'd think that it is only uninteresting if you know who they are, which can be said of almost every hook. If there anything else which is uncited? TarnishedPathtalk 16:15, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TarnishedPath: Infobox and citations are OK. I suppose I can only speak for myself when saying if something is interesting, but the provided hook only describes a stated aim of a Western far-right organization which may well apply to dozens of far-right organizations around the world. I don't see anything exceptional about it. (Just to be clear, this is my 3rd time reviewing a DYK, so I'm not the most experienced to talk about this. If you disagree, then I would be OK with a second opinion.) ―Howard🌽33 16:26, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Howardcorn33, no worries, I'll take you up on your suggestion and request a second opinion. TarnishedPathtalk 16:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TarnishedPathtalk 04:31, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TarnishedPathtalk 07:19, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]