This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views articles
Sovereign citizen movement is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article describes the Sovereign citizen movement with derogatory statements, generalizations and opinions which are not substantiated with verifiable evidence. It sounds more like a government propaganda piece than a neutral document. Readers should be informed with facts and not indoctrinated with vitriol.
For example, phrases like “financial scammers”, “conspiracy theorists”, “pseudolegal belief system”, “misinterpretation of common law”, and “perceived government oppression” should be supported with evidence that this is the case with a majority of members. 174.90.104.46 (talk) 22:59, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the 227 references? The article is about the movement as described in reliable sources, not a demographic survey of adherents' views. Acroterion(talk)23:20, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If references are being used correctly, they only provide factual information. A correct way to invoke references in characterizing the Sovereign Citizen movement would be to say something along the lines of 'JM Berger in a study published by George Washington University Press, characterizes the Sovereign Citizen movement as pseudolegal, racist, radical, (etc)'. Numerous of these, particularly the characterization as radical or extremist, are ultimately subjective characterizations. Not factual. To provide a factual account of the Sovereign Citizens Movement ought to be the goal of this wiki. Not to lend voice to discrediting the movement, rightly or wrongly. 108.21.99.26 (talk) 04:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, and I checked one of the sources which characterizes this movement as having originated from "racist anti-government movements". I did not find any reference to white supremacist or racist political movements in the source material that was being used as a reference for this claim. This article is writted with extreme bias. It does not express the views of this group in a neutral and factual voice, but is rife with subtextual condemnations. 108.21.99.26 (talk) 04:20, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I partially retract this reply. The reference does supposedly make a case for certain elements of the sovereign citizen movement to find precedent among white nationalist movements of the 1870s, but I would maintain that these are not deductively reasoned, and even if they were, this is a historiographical characterization, which derives from a certain historical narrative. To maintain neutrality in this article, the conclusions drawn from the historiography of the Soveriegn Citizens Movement ought to be presented as historiographical, rather than as robust or innate factual account of the movement. The multiple layers of distance from primary documents, I would argue, further supply reasoning why the conclusions derived from these historical analyses ought to be presented as the historical work of XYZ institution or historian. They are arguments, not facts. 108.21.99.26 (talk) 04:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of what you describe is a virtue rather than a vice. Wikipedia has chosen to base itself off of reliable secondary sources, and so primary sources are to be used with care if at all. When there is a clear consensus among secondary sources as to a fact or conclusion, then it is appropriate to state that in Wikivoice. You seem much closer to talking about original research, which is a wonderful thing, but not why Wikipedia is here. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 22:20, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One reference isn't sufficient to demonstrate that this is an alternative term that merits mention. Whether SCs prefer the term or not is irrelevant. VQuakr (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
