Talk:European Federation of Centres of Research and Information on Sectarianism
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the European Federation of Centres of Research and Information on Sectarianism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days ![]() |
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Fecris Members
[edit]They have a complete list on their site http://griess.st1.at/gsk/fecris/fecrmemb.htm--Themadhair (talk) 15:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- The page change a little: list of members.
The table does not look good. Each flag looks different. better is tu use Flag icon (If no remarks, I will change it and maybe expand according to the link.--DeeMusil (talk) 11:55, 5 December 2012 (UTC)) It would be good to change table to table sortable, so each can choose sorting according to country or name.
- partially done--DeeMusil (talk) 15:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Use as a source on Wikipedia
[edit]By now, we have an extensive criticism section on this article, detailing seven paragraphs of the various antics of this network implicating it in ideological partisanship. Not least the antics of former Vice President Alexander Dvorkin, who is noted for his closeness to the Putin regime and involvement in the Russo-Ukrainian War controversy and the fact that the French body which essentially controls this, the UNADFI is heavily under the influence of French Freemasonry, in the words of its Ex-President Janine Tavernier, who resigned in 2002: "Little by little a lot of Freemasons have entered the UNADFI, giving it a shade it hadn't had originally" (current President, Catherine Picard, is a member of the Co-Freemasonry organisation Le Droit humain).
Yet for some reason, we still use member bodies of this organisation as references right the way across Wikipedia article, unqualified, as if their word is completely golden, as if they are some sort of neutral "watchdog". I am not against using them as a reference to say that "FECRIS group has attacked X organisation as a cult", but we need to explicitly lay out that its their opinion. They are clearly not a WP:NPOV on the groups they write about. JustAChurchMouse (talk) 23:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)