"

 The British National Front was and is 'far-right', yes? Let's not whitewash in this article. 

In putting the term 'far right' before 'National Front', and removing the uncited last line that appears to promote Griffin (""Since he became the leader of the BNP several educational institutions have invited him to speak on political radicalism, multiculturalism, and BNP policy."") I have been reverted and accused of 'vandalism' by a regular editor here, User:Parrot of Doom. I would like to say that nobody WP:OWNS Wikipedia articles, and it is against Wikipedia policy to use the term 'vandalism' for an essentially 'POV' issue (POV means someone expressing a point of view) - especially one that is effectively factual - namely the NF being 'far-right'. Wikipedia describes the NF as ""a far right and whites-only party"" in its main article - and this fact was as true when Griffin was a member of it as it is now. I also gave the clear reasons for removing the promotionally-phrased last line - so I'm not a vandal.

Having maintained that the National Front is indeed 'far right', can anyone really claim that adding this fact to this article is unhelpful or irrelevant? The current introducton gives very little real flavour of Nick Griffin (and his obvious 'notoriety' is left out completely), which compared to other Wikipedia articles on politicians is pretty scandalous in my eyes. Why be so accommodating to Griffin of all people? It looks like whitewashing is going on to me.

We need to do some work here people, and pull together some references:  there are plenty in Nick Griffins case!   "