| Revision as of 09:57, 10 October 2021 editEmigré55 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,917 edits →Zemmour and Le Figaro: answer to Munci← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 16:50, 6 September 2024 edit undoChopinAficionado (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,210 editsmNo edit summary |
| (570 intermediate revisions by 65 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{talk header}} |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=B|listas=Zemmour, Eric}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|collapsed=yes|class=C|listas=Zemmour, Eric| |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-work-group=yes|a&e-priority=low||politician-work-group=yes|politician-priority=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|class=B|importance=high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject France|class=B|importance=high}} |
|
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|class=C|importance=high}} |
|
{{WikiProject France|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject European history|importance=low}} |
|
| blp=yes |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject LGBT studies}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Radio|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Television|importance=low}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=blp}} |
|
|
{{section sizes}} |
|
|
{{dual page views}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
| algo=old(30d) |
|
|
| archive=Talk:Éric Zemmour/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
| counter=3 |
|
|
| maxarchivesize=150K |
|
|
| archiveheader={{Talk archive}} |
|
|
| minthreadsleft=4 |
|
|
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion == |
|
== WikiProject class rating== |
|
|
|
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: |
|
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. ] 08:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-03-29T03:52:20.618054 | Éric Zemmour Toulon 03-2022 (cropped).jpg --> |
|
|
|
|
|
Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 03:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This sentence is problematic: |
|
|
''He also believes that within a European community, the political right and left are forced to advocate "the same economic policy, social liberalism or liberal socialism"'' |
|
|
|
|
|
It was obviously translated directly from the French article: |
|
|
''Selon lui, à cause de l'Union européenne, la gauche comme la droite ne peuvent qu'appliquer « la même politique , le social-libéralisme ou le libéralisme-social »'' |
|
|
|
|
|
My problem is that libéralisme-social doesn't mean the same thing at all as liberal socialism. Liberal socialism is a term sometimes used (ignorantly) in American English to mean social democracy or democratic socialism, (e.g. Michael Moore is sometimes called a "liberal socialist"), while libéralisme-social has nothing to do with socialism, it's basically another way of saying social-libéralisme (e.g. Barack Obama). Zemmour was making a kind of play of words; I think it can't really be translated, it would be better to simply put it: ''...are forced to advocate "the same economic policy, social liberalism.'' In any case the word socialism should go, because Zemmour didn't mean to say the EU promotes any kind of socialism, which is the point of his criticism. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 03:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
"Ethnicity" does not mean nothing in France since nobody really cares about it. Mr. Zemmour parents were French citizens when Algeria was a French colony. Just as their parents and grand-parents also were. Mr. Zemmour joked himself with that because Zemmour is a name of Berber origin (it means "olive") and people which are Jews, Christians or Muslims, may bear it. Nobody will tell that someone like Mr. Édouard Balladur is "ethnically Armenian" or that Mr. Nicolas Sarkozy is "ethnically Hungarian". I think that clearing this from is infobox would be better, because antisemitic nationalists only would use it in France.--] (]) 15:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== hate speech == |
|
|
|
|
|
What are the reasons for censoring a contribution ? I wrote that Zemmour is in difficulty because of his hate speech, a fact that is well established in France because he has been condemned. User yintan undid my cotribution but gives no reason, and can't be reached. |
|
|
|
|
|
Should I start to undo his undoing ??? Or how to stop his unjustified censoring ? |
|
|
|
|
|
--] (]) 21:20, 28 December 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
:Misplaced Pages takes great care in how we describe ], and this is not always easy for relatively new Wikipedians to get correct. As a rule of thumb, a potential negative comment on an individual should be concrete and backed up by reference, as well as dispassionate in language. Thus, instead of writing that Zemmour is notorious for hate speech, it's rather recommended to write exactly what he has been convicted for and include a reference or more. If there are references included in the body of the article, you don't necessarily need to include it in the lede though (and as you can see the conviction for racism in covered in the body of this article). In addition to condemnation in courts, one may also include criticism from respectable individuals/organizations etc, but criticism should be given due weight and do not always belong in the lede. As finding the right phrasing and nature of criticism of an individual can be complicated and is very sensitive, it may often be a good idea to not jump right into these issues until one has a good grasp in general of the rules and practices of Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 22:08, 28 December 2016 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== "Alternate History Novel"? == |
|
|
|
|
|
The article makes reference to "the alternate history novel by Frédéric Deslauriers (2011), Les Deux-Cents jours de Marine Le Pen..." and describes her winning the 2012 election. I'm re-phrasing this as 'speculative fiction' since a novel written in 2011 can't be an "alternate history" as it dealt with the then-future (unless we're also going to consider a LOT of science fiction to be "alternate history" because history subsequently took a different course).] (]) 05:50, 16 September 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Section "Cases before French jurisdictions" == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{POV section}} |
|
|
] only deals with his two lost cases.<br> |
|
|
Whereas there are at least 5 other instances where he won against the persons or entities who sued him on similar grounds (racism, hate, defamation). |
|
|
See, in French: https://fr.wikipedia.org/Éric_Zemmour#Relaxes<br> |
|
|
This section is also greatly unbalanced. |
|
|
--] (]) 13:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
As nobody improved the section since this warning, I have introduced a sub section on the 6 legal cases he won so far.<br> Thus the banners do not seem to be necessary anymore, and I have removed them for the whole section.--] (]) 07:45, 3 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Section "]" == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{POV section}} |
|
|
{{Unbalanced|section|date=October 2021}} |
|
|
--] (]) 15:51, 3 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*Shouldn't we first get some input from the editor who put up the tags? The onus of showing/proving why the taga are deserved is on said editor. -] (]) 09:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Section "]" == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{POV section}} |
|
|
{{Unbalanced|section|date=October 2021}} |
|
|
--] (]) 16:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Far right? == |
|
|
<small>Note: The initial comment was previously posted at ]. ] (]) 22:07, 5 October 2021 (UTC)</small><br> |
|
|
Hello, As you reverted my previous reorganisation of Zemmour's presentation, I would like to discuss it with you as your grounds are not accurate and/or complete. |
|
|
He was and is first known in France as a journalist and famous book writer, who became then famous as a polemist on TV talk shows, before "exploding" this year with his expected/soon to be candidacy to the presidential election. This is the somewhat chronological approach and emphasis on his main activities first which my editing tries to reflect. |
|
|
As to the the "far right" qualification, 2 things: 1/ it is debated, as you can read in the section on his political views (pls read third sentence), and especially by Jean-Yves Camus, the most eminent specialist of far right and extremists movements in France (I added his quote on this subject). Not all the media call him a "far right", and I am documenting this and will soon edit on this as well. 2/ "Far right" is often used with a negative or even derogatory meaning (in France at least but even in the US), and as he himself describes as a "Gaullist & Napoleanist" (which is not far right), and is also described as such by other media, this article deserves now a more precise presentation of him on this single aspect as well. |
|
|
Trust this helps you understand my cautious approach to a careful reoganization of this presentation, to encompass all aspects of this person, without giving too much or biased importance to a particular aspect of his biography/personality. Wihtout, of course, deleting any previous info. Just reorganising and balancing them when needed, as I did, to be also as neutral as possible. Cheers, --] (]) 21:44, 5 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: Someone's self designation is irrelevant, we don't describe ] in wikivoice as a paleoconservative, even though that's what he self-identifies as, because reliable sources labell him a far-right conspiracy theorist. Zemmour has been labelled as far-right in numerous english language sources, including , , , which describes him as more radical than Marine Le Pen, describes him as "known for his far-right nationalism". Jean Yves Camus definiton of Far-right, which excludes all but literal facists and neo-nazis, is at odds with most mainstream definitions of far right, and would exclude well known european far-right figures such as ]. ] (]) 22:04, 5 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::You are right in saying that Zemmour has been described (far right) as such by many sources. Sources I did not remove, btw; I even added a footnote (a) listing them all. But not all sources describe him so. How do we balance then this ? I believe my editing is a better way to do it than a blunt "far right" first hand description, which does not encompass the entirety of this person and the complexity of the subject. Which other way would you suggest?--] (]) 22:13, 5 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::I personally don't think that Camus definition would exclude Robinson. Will try and look to see if he studied him.--] (]) 22:16, 5 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::I will add soon other sources describing him other than "far right". Just allow me the time to do it, as I have also other duties. cheers, --] (]) 22:19, 5 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Here is a list of other political qualifications used by other French media to present him, as I edited it in the article (with due sources of the many media concerned): "Many other French media present him also “on the right”, or even in the “conservative right”, or as “Gaullist”, or in the “sovereignist right”, or in the “radical right”, or in the “radical and identitary right”: |
|
|
:::, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|
|
:::cheers, --] (]) 13:20, 6 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Zemmour « far right » before his professional qualifications in the introduction?=== |
|
|
{{ping|Hemiauchenia}}, The introduction should first reflect a summary of the article, not someone’s opinion: Yours (which your last edit here reflects), or mine (I personally only try to balance the article/writing, to reflect all different sources first, NPOV then, not to forget WP: BLP), or of any particular media (which use different words to qualify him politically).<br> |
|
|
The article begins with a section mainly about his professional life, in which his political qualification is only secondary.<br> |
|
|
Writing ''«...is a French far-right political journalist, essayist, writer and television pundit»'' as you did in the first sentence, is qualifying him BEFORE even saying what he is professionally. What is not reflecting the article. <br> |
|
|
|
|
|
And qualifying him in one way only, with a highly charged word, “far right”, is also not reflecting the various sources available, including the ones you rightly added to enrich the list of sources available.<br> |
|
|
More over, it is not possible to qualify him as “far right” only, while you acknowledge then and write in the 3rd § that ''“mainstream news organizations characterize him as right-wing to far right.»''<br> |
|
|
His qualification is both different from one media to another (a), AND subject to controversies (b:<br> |
|
|
(a) The new list of English speaking media you introduced yourself contains media who precisely not qualify him as far right, or use different qualification: Two of the list even qualify him in their title as “right wing” (''« conservative »'' as Politico in his title, suggesting hence that they consider him more as such as ''« far right »'', a qualifier they only use once later in the article )<br> |
|
|
(b) Controversies on the meaning of “far right”, as illustrated by articles on history of far right, or radical right, and more important by the widely known specialist of far right in France nowadays (see Jean Yves Camus’ citation on Zemmour being not “far right”, ] ) |
|
|
Finally, a mere research in Google shows « Zemmour + far right”: 971.000 results, and “Zemmour + rightwing”: 822.000 results, so quite similar results. |
|
|
|
|
|
Hence, the previous introduction was better structured, encompassing all notions and respecting both the article and a balanced approach to the various qualifications used to depict him in the media (WP:BLP).<br> |
|
|
--] (]) 05:03, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: We clearly have very different irreconcilable perspectives here. I don't see how this will get resolved without outside input. ] (]) 05:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::I don't think so. And I will sincerely feel sorry if you feel our perspectives are as you describe. I have not reverted all your inputs, on the contrary. Your sources added are welcome, and I included them in a dedicated note. I hope you will nevertheless agree with me that these media call him differently, not only "far right", and that it should be reflected without giving unbalanced and hence undue importance to "far right". Especially in the intro. The rest of the article develops anyway the controversy. cheers, --] (]) 05:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: It's nothing personal, it's just it's not possible to form a robust consensus with two people who have different opinions, only a compromise, and I'd prefer for other people to chime in and give their thoughts, otherwise we just keep going round in circles. ] (]) 05:41, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I don't think so. I think the intro has well progressed, thanks to your inputs and mine. I can also live with your last change (moving up the section on how he is qualified), although I personnaly think that it is better in the last paragraph, as it links well with the following sentence about the NYT article. --] (]) 05:45, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Having said that, I encourage you to look at ], in the article itself, and improve them. They are a total mess, lacking a lot of infos, and presenting things in a very partial way, non neutral, and totally unbalanced. --] (]) 05:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: Is the french wikipedia equivalent a good guide on what content is missing from this article, or would you consider that article also biased? What parts of Zemmours early career are most worthy of mention? ] (]) 05:57, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::The French wikipedia is unfortunately very biased. His career as a writer is most worthy of mention, because of the huge success of his books and under and/or misrepresentation of them and his ideas, and the fact that the part of his career as a TV pundit is overrepresented, which both create a serious balance problem, particularly concerning the description and representation of his ideas.--] (]) 09:14, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::The French article is not biased. What he is most well known for being a polemicist. That might be not a profession, but it's certainly the case. I find the intro has recently regressed. ] (]) 09:26, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== "Violent speech" == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2022 == |
|
The word 'violent' should be removed here. ] (]) 17:57, 6 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Éric Zemmour|answered=yes}} |
|
== Jewish Berber? == |
|
|
|
"Far-right" in French politics (socialist country at the core) is the equivalent of moderate / republican in the USA. |
|
|
It is dishonest to simply translate the terms used in mostly left newspapers and medias to describe the political orientation in an article for English-speakers. ] (]) 01:35, 1 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a ] for this alteration ''']''' using the {{tlx|edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> ––] <span style="border-radius:7em;padding:2.5px 3.5px;background:#005bed;font-size:76%">]</span> 01:44, 1 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion == |
|
<small>Note: The initial comment was previously posted at ]. ] (]) 19:10, 6 October 2021 (UTC) </small> <br> |
|
|
|
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: |
|
Hello, I don't believe that precising that his parents are Jewish Berbers is appropriate in the introduction. Just because something is well sourced doesn't mean it should be in the introduction, has it doesn't have anything to do with his political views or his biography in general. |
|
|
|
* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-04-03T00:37:09.254751 | Impossible n'est pas français.jpg --> |
|
|
Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 00:37, 3 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Citation overkill == |
|
Faithfully --] (]) 18:52, 6 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: It's in his early life section. The fact that Zemmour is jewish is a noteworthy piece of background context, especially for his views on muslims. I don't think it's undue to mention it. ] (]) 19:10, 6 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: I've reverted as I didn't understand that he was only removing it from the lead. As such I've reverted myself. ] (]) 20:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I see a citation overkill in A and B notes on the start of the page. This makes me question; what the fuck is this? -''']''' - ] - 14:18, 19 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
== Zemmour and Le Figaro == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, i found even more unneccessary citations... -''']''' - ] - 14:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
], hello, <br> |
|
|
|
: Check the history of this page to understand the history of the debate. ] (]) 17:24, 20 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
Zemmour was not "dismissed" from Le Figaro. Please do not extend and/or relay fake news yourself. You are right to write that these infos were written by supposed "reliable" sources. But they are fake news, as stated afterwards, with all due evidences, by other reliable sources which did fact checking (whereas previous sources you only rely on only did not!) and gave evidence, such as the letter of the former managing director of Le Figaro, on this subject, which you can read in the sources I gave: In 2010 (not 2009, another fake news), he was '''moved''' by '']'' to '']'', allegedly after making controversial statements in other media but '''in fact because his salary was too high for a low weekly production'''.<ref>http://www.slate.fr/story/19171/zemmour-9700-euros-pour-un-petit-papier-par-semaine</ref><ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20141020122451/http://electronlibre.info/archives/spip.php?page=article&id_article=00670.</ref> --] (]) 13:46, 9 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:@] The bottom line is that someone needs to clean that up and retain only the most relevant refs, but no one has had the willpower to do so. Probably because it's been the most controversial aspect of this article and almost guaranteed to be ]'d. ] ] 17:45, 20 April 2022 (UTC) |
|
: So basically he was going to be fired, but he got shifted instead, and it was because he undercontributed with respect to his contract. ] (]) 09:29, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::Yes, hence, writing that he was "dismissed" first, and because of the alleged following reasons you reinstated then, is contrary to the facts and truth. (and evidences given, such as the letter of the managing director of Le Figaro, if you have read the sources I introduced for that). |
|
|
::Please cancel that part you wrongly reinstated.--] (]) 09:57, 10 October 2021 (UTC) |
|
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
"Far-right" in French politics (socialist country at the core) is the equivalent of moderate / republican in the USA.
It is dishonest to simply translate the terms used in mostly left newspapers and medias to describe the political orientation in an article for English-speakers. 210.3.237.106 (talk) 01:35, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
.jpg){kind=link}
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the 
