Talk:Controversies surrounding the Society of Saint Pius X

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Controversies surrounding the Society of Saint Pius X article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Catholicism Mid‑importance

Controversies surrounding the Society of Saint Pius X is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

France Mid‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[List of conspiracy theories#Jewish world domination|Jewish world domination plot]] The anchor (#Jewish world domination) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Untitled

I just removed a section from the article whose entire contents were:

In the United States, the Society has been accused of spreading allegedly fascist, un-American political ideas, and undermining American patriotism.^[1]^[2]

I removed it for several reasons. First, it is full of peakock terms---it does tell you who made the allegations, what they were, or why. Second, reading the source, I have to say it is anything but reliable. It is almost 17 years old and is more of a position piece of the author as compared to a reliabel source. Do I believe the allegations might be true? Yes. Can I accept the vagueness of the above statement as true? No. Can I accept the sources provided? Definitely not. Before reinserting please provide valid sources along with specifics.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 14:27, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

The above link is broken, here's the article in Wayback Machine: Thomas W. Case: The Society of St. Pius X Gets Sick

And a more recent article (May 2020) on similar subjects, by Dr John R. Lamont: SSPX and Infiltration of Sex Abusers Spoutn1k (talk) 12:26, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:37, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Controversies surrounding the Society of St. Pius X. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1204487.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928040757/http://www.angelusonline.org/print.php?sid=831 to http://www.angelusonline.org/print.php?sid=831

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Controversies surrounding the Society of St. Pius X. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:41, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Thomas W. Case: The Society of St. Pius X Gets Sick

[2] Responses by Thomas W. Case to criticisms of his article "The Society of St. Pius X Gets Sick"

[1]

[2]