Revision as of 21:11, 21 April 2016 editIñaki LL (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,820 edits →French police: Removed libel← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:47, 21 April 2016 edit undoIñaki LL (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,820 edits →French police: I am not taking libels, plus intimidating comment removedNext edit → | ||
Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
::PS For better traceability of the thread by other editors, please add ]. ] (]) 22:17, 16 April 2016 (UTC) | ::PS For better traceability of the thread by other editors, please add ]. ] (]) 22:17, 16 April 2016 (UTC) | ||
::: ]I was talking about the removal of reference to Alósegui who was murdered by Elejalde. What reason could you possibly have for editing that out? Its messed up... If I leave you guys to your devices I know what this is going to look like... |
::: ]I was talking about the removal of reference to Alósegui who was murdered by Elejalde. What reason could you possibly have for editing that out? Its messed up... If I leave you guys to your devices I know what this is going to look like... ] (]) 21:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)] I concede some of your edits / corrections may have been ok and I removed them by mistake. But Iñaki, for me to remain civil you have to ] (]) 21:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)]. If your edits are strictly NPOV and use credible sources, I wont be able to accuse you of anything.] (]) 23:12, 16 April 2016 (UTC) | ||
::::] You may be '''] without further warning''' the next time you make ] on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.<!-- Template:uw-npa4 --> ] (]) 21:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC) | ::::] You may be '''] without further warning''' the next time you make ] on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors.<!-- Template:uw-npa4 --> ] (]) 21:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:47, 21 April 2016
Articles for creation B‑class | ||||||||||
|
Organizations B‑class | ||||||||||
|
Iñaki
(Personal attack removed) Asilah1981 (talk) 15:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
- There is an ongoing discussion in the ANI referring to this personal attack by Asilah1981, and to others found in Talk:Basque conflict. The above comment will be removed once the discussion if over. Iñaki LL (talk) 08:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Systemic bias
Article written by a phantom user Adam Ci who seeemingly deletes his/her account after each edit - possibly to avoid potential criminal charges under Spanish law. It is written in a tone which justifies and glorifies a proscribed terrorist organization, defines the "basque conflict" and ETA as a necessary reaction to Spanish oppression of the basque people attempts to portray convicted terrorists as prisoners of conscience, claims as fact that Spanish authorities systematically use torture, provides a detailed list of every single convict in Spain carefully ommitting what they were convicted for or who were their victims... a long etc...
Outrageous and illegal in the real world, contrary to Misplaced Pages policy in this platform.Asilah1981 (talk) 17:08, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
I a rewriting the first paragraph, making it mirror the MLNV article which seems to be neutral and without ETA advocacy. The initial section is the most problematic in terms of NPOV, the rest can be slowly improved and ETA sympathetic language and bias slowly corrected.Asilah1981 (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
- 1. The systemic bias claim is not what you mean, there is nothing that points to a systemic bias in the Spanish or world press or the WP altogether in favour of Basque prisoners or ETA whatsoever.
- 2. Your claim above is not very collaborative, but fairly accusatory: "phantom user", "ETA advocacy", "criminal charges", glorifies terrorists (where?), "carefully omitting", "outrageous and illegal", "contrary to the wikipedia policy", and is generally out of the WP building process.
- 2. Your POV is fine, but it is POV, point to specific problems in a way that can help build a better article.
- 3. Your changes were made all in a row when this important subject involving you in ANI was being discussed (I have not checked them, but I am interested in regular WP building)
- 4. I still consider that a number of violations (both confirmed and allegations) by the Spanish state of international treaties on human rights and prisons are still not addressed.
- 5. Please use regular edit summaries and discuss relevant changes. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:49, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Iñaki LL I was about to remove my (perhaps hasty slightly unfair) comment in Spanish as an act of good faith towards you, but I see you have already done so. I say we give this a week to both cool down and both engage in a constructive manner here after that. Listen we are both in Spain and we can't pretend not to be on two sides of a political divide. Nevertheless, we can perhaps come to a consensus here. I ask you to understand why some of us are touchy with this topic. Its not about having an authoritarian streak but about refusing to allow murderers to rewrite history after 40 years murdering. I haven't touched much this article, except the opening paragraph I just pretty copy pasted it from the article MLNV, which was hardly written by Fuerza Nueva. Please read carefully how the opening para. was before. Surely you understand why it was upsetting?
Also, I think it would be best if we talked frankly rather than being excessively pharisaic in our speech and arguments.
Best, Asilah1981 (talk) 09:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
- I do not have time now to deal with this, so I will check in time everything is in place per WP policies for a balanced, accurate article including legitimate and relevant information to the topic if needed. Iñaki LL (talk) 12:21, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
- In order to ease traceability for other editors, please proceed in this sensitive article as follows per WP rules: for all the changes you do, I suggest you work first on your sandbox then add it altogether or in a couple of edits to the article, do add clearly the edit summary, see also here, as I pointed above, like every proper editor does. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Self reverted.Iñaki LLAsilah1981 (talk) 20:27, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
People tortured by GAL operatives
Yesterday I added a new case to the 'Specific cases and convictions' section. I now believe I made a mistake because although Lasa and Zabala were kidnapped, tortured and killed, they were never really prisoners in the sense that all other people mentioned in this article are or were. I think adding this example was a mistake because it blurs what this article is talking about, and merges it with GAL, which to me is really different. For me this article should be about people in custody, on remand, or jailed by a judge. What do you think? I'm going to delete that bit now, but if people object it can be put back. Adam Cli (talk) 13:47, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
As you know, I find the style and aim of this whole article extremely dodgy, even though at least your attitude is positive. And yes, I agree that there should be a distinction between an entirely criminal enterprise such as the GAL and mistreatment which may occur within the normal process of police arrest and interrogation.Asilah1981 (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
French police
Hi, Asilah1981, in the Torture section there is a paragraph about the French police. Yesterday you added some text and a reference. I don't know if it is just me, but what you wrote seems to imply that the reason people were not tortured by the French police is that French civilians and security forces were not targeted by ETA. This may or may not be true, but I don't think the reference mentions torture at all. The reason for the supposed absence of torture by French police could be because they do not leave prisoners 'incommunicado' for so long, and there are many other possible explanations. But I don't think either of us know yet what that reason is. Can you see what I'm saying? I know you want to add the context of the French situation to the paragraph, but I think it needs to be done in a different way, or with a different ref. Adam Cli (talk) 17:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Adam Cli I'll edit it down, but not being party to a conflict is sufficiently evident causality to not engage in violence. Asilah1981 (talk) 21:46, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
- Strictly with references (WP:VER), and summary line, as per WP:Etiquette. POV or unsourced material may be challenged with no delay. Iñaki LL (talk) 23:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
It is against WP:Etiquette "" to do so again.Asilah1981 (talk) 01:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
The discussion followed in Asilah1981's talk page. It has been brought here because it affects this article's editing. --Xabier Armendaritz 15:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)I am not sure you are understanding what WP is about. I thought you would after all stick to constructive editing, but I am not so sure. This is nobody's courtyard, WP is not about point illustrating, it is about building a better article. I tried to help you out if you did not know the rules of the Misplaced Pages by adding relevant links to is policies and guidelines, like the one about the summary line, you have not followed them. You have also removed verified information. Do add maximum detail and accuracy in your interventions, and please refrain from citing me linked to your offensive personal comments or views against me. I add a link here for you to further understand what personal attack is. Will take a close look to your changes when I have time. Iñaki LL (talk) 07:59, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Iñaki LL you are editing in bad faith, which is what gets me angry. Deleting the paragraph referring to the subject's victim for not having a source knowing full well the information is true (you are from Guipuzcoa). That is bad faith. I know there are ETA sympathisers in the country or people who think it was a "morally balanced conflict". I can't demand they not learn english or refrain from editing wikipedia, but at least you can so in good faith. I am accepting Adam Clii s edits even though he has largely the same views (or worse) as you, because he is currently editing overall in an acceptable way. I'll keep away from the article for now, it gives me ulcer to read some of your edits.Asilah1981 (talk) 11:24, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- What the hell are you talking about? Stick to good faith and constructive editing, that is all we need to do. We do not need censors, or POV editors, the more relevant and accurate the information you can add, the better. Pinpoint exact problems, I am not here to follow all your sweeping comments or personal views or derogatory remarks, WP has its own mechanisms to deal with irregular behavior, and you are not free of that. Adam Cli and any other WP editor is free and encouraged to add whatever s/he sees necessary to improve the article as long as it sticks to WP policies and guidelines, do you understand?
- Stick to civility, do not use again my name next to slandering comments of yours in the summary line, like here and here. By the way, please do not revert again, it is stating just what the source say, that he was tortured (clear), evidence provided, and his death, plus you removed citation needed tags. It will be taken as WP:disruptive editing, and any further undue comments as harassment, that may ultimately result in your blocking. I hope I do not have to come back again to this. Will check your edits again when I can. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:17, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- PS For better traceability of the thread by other editors, please add WP:INDENT. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:17, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- Iñaki LLI was talking about the removal of reference to Alósegui who was murdered by Elejalde. What reason could you possibly have for editing that out? Its messed up... If I leave you guys to your devices I know what this is going to look like... I concede some of your edits / corrections may have been ok and I removed them by mistake. But Iñaki, for me to remain civil you have to . If your edits are strictly NPOV and use credible sources, I wont be able to accuse you of anything.Asilah1981 (talk) 23:12, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Iñaki LL (talk) 21:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Iñaki LLI was talking about the removal of reference to Alósegui who was murdered by Elejalde. What reason could you possibly have for editing that out? Its messed up... If I leave you guys to your devices I know what this is going to look like... I concede some of your edits / corrections may have been ok and I removed them by mistake. But Iñaki, for me to remain civil you have to . If your edits are strictly NPOV and use credible sources, I wont be able to accuse you of anything.Asilah1981 (talk) 23:12, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
- Iñaki LL By refusing to answer my question, you answer it well enough and simply confirm the veracity of everything which you claim to be a personal attack.Asilah1981 (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)