Talk:Blue Square Alliance Against Hate

Vandalism

WikiCleanerMan Did a Rollback. "It is used to undo problematic edits such as vandalism."

My edits weren't vandalism.

why does a significantly political organization have no actual page

I came to Wikipedia to get Wikipedia's take on the Foundation to Combat Antisemitism, which is publishing information on the web. It's nice to get a little context.

Can we get a page up for it? I'm down for pulling relevant info from the Robert Kraft page.

I'll start something. SubcomandanteOvashinsky (talk) 15:19, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

NFL Citation

Currently, footnote 4 cites an AP article published by the NFL website. The page has been archived. However, the same AP report was also published by Times of Israel (https://www.timesofisrael.com/patriots-owner-kraft-pledges-20-million-to-battle-anti-semitism-bds/) and is not archived. I think TOI looks more legit then the NFL website so it might be good to switch the citation over to that. I will do that soon unless anyone has concerns. RubyFjord (talk) 06:42, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

AI Content?

The new Ad campaign feels a little AI-generated. I'll clean and fix the tenses and POV. Would appreciate any help. --FeldBum (talk) 20:39, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Criticism

In order to achieve a NPOV, it is appropriate to attempt to include controversies that an organization is included in. Including a section on Criticism is way to do that.

Please, when making edits to this page, don't simply delete Criticism.

If people keep removing Criticism, I suggest adding the NPOV Flag to show that this article showcases only one side.

SubcomandanteOvashinsky (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

It is appropriate to include controversies. However, a separate section for criticism is specifically discouraged in our guidelines. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, sounds good, I can include the controversy that way. SubcomandanteOvashinsky (talk) 22:42, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

The accusation, as it's not related to the Genesis prize belongs in a separate paragraph. The paragraph, which starts at the 2019 Prize which started the org, should focus on it. SubcomandanteOvashinsky (talk) 15:24, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

As the criticism addresses its claims of why the organization was created, it would make sense as part of a paragraph on the creation of the organization. However, we don't actually have such a paragraph at this point, which is a major hole. We leap directly from someone pledged money for a cause to, years later, and organization being criticized. I'm also concerned that giving a paragraph creates undue emphasis for an opinion piece by one person writing outside their primary field (albeit in a notable outlet.) Do we have any third-party coverage noting that that this particular piece is of import? -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)