This is an old revision of this page, as edited by D.Creish (talk | contribs) at 02:25, 17 December 2018 (→Criticism of Guardian reporting and Assange's purported Trump criticism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 02:25, 17 December 2018 by D.Creish (talk | contribs) (→Criticism of Guardian reporting and Assange's purported Trump criticism)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Julian Assange article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
List of works about Julian Assange was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 25 May 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Julian Assange. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
A news item involving Julian Assange was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 16 August 2012. |
This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This note in a nutshell: It is considered good practice to provide a summary for every edit. See Help:Edit summary. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Julian Assange article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Section to be changed: Swedish sexual assault allegations
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the following sentences:
He was questioned, the case was initially closed, and he was told he could leave the country. In November 2010, however, the case was re-opened by a special prosecutor who said that she wanted to question Assange over two counts of sexual molestation, one count of unlawful coercion and one count of "lesser-degree rape" (mindre grov våldtäkt).
to:
An initial arrest warrant was issued, but was withdrawn the next day when prosecutors dropped the suspected rape from the investigation. Assange was questioned, but was told he could leave the country. Shortly after, however, the Swedish Director of Prosecution announced that she wanted to question Assange further, again including rape in the alleged crimes. In November 2010 the Svea Court of Appeal approved the prosecutor's request to detain Assange for questioning regarding two counts of sexual molestation, one count of unlawful coercion and one count of "lesser-degree rape" (mindre grov våldtäkt). By this time Assange had traveled to London and an international arrest warrant was issued through Interpol.
so that the whole paragraph reads:
Assange visited Sweden in August 2010. During his visit, he became the subject of sexual assault allegations from two women with whom he had sex. An initial arrest warrant was issued, but was withdrawn the next day when prosecutors dropped the suspected rape from the investigation. Assange was questioned, but was told he could leave the country. Shortly after, however, the Swedish Director of Prosecution announced that she wanted to question Assange further, again including rape in the alleged crimes. In November 2010 the Svea Court of Appeal approved the prosecutor's request to detain Assange for questioning regarding two counts of sexual molestation, one count of unlawful coercion and one count of "lesser-degree rape" (mindre grov våldtäkt). By this time Assange had traveled to London and an international arrest warrant was issued through Interpol. Assange denied the allegations and said he was happy to face questions in Britain.
Description of the change
Firstly, I am not reverting to the old charges :). I am, however, including some additional information regarding the initial arrest warrant, and the rape suspicion being dropped and reinstated. As the description stands today there are also a few incorrect details. I have tried to keep the edited text as brief as possible, while improving on the issues listed below:
- It is not accurate to say that the case was closed. This wording implies that all suspicions and investigations were dropped. The fact is that the molestation investigation continued. There was, however, an initial arrest warrant for rape that was rescinded after only one day. At that point the only suspicion was for molestation.
- As follows from point 1 the case was not reopened. The following things happened that deserve mentioning:
- The prosecutor listed suspicions and made a request for detention shortly after (September 1st 2010), not in November.
- The courts ruled on this and confirmed the charges in November.
- An international arrest warrant was issued.
- The order of statements in the first sentence implies an incorrect order of events. The initial rape suspicion was dropped before Assange was questioned, not after.
- The Swedish Director of Prosecution is the accurate title, not "special prosecutor". No special prosecutor was assigned.
The BBC has an excellent timeline that I added as a source in my edit.
I hope someone finds this useful. UppsalaHenrik (talk) 15:54, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Sources |
---|
|
- Not done: The ref tags are not placed at the exact position where the text in which they verify resides, per WP:INTEGRITY. Spintendo 02:07, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- That seems like a pretty trivial reason to reject the entire edit. Assuming the ref tags were moved to the correct positions, what would you think of the edit? -Thucydides411 (talk) 18:43, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- The proposed text looks better written and more complete than what it replaces. @UppsalaHenrik: Are you willing to match each sentence with a source? You can reuse the same source multiple times, e.g. the timeline. — JFG 23:39, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
charged?
How shall we treat this nyt.com content? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
source does not support claim about hacking
The article flatly states that Assange hacked a variety of institutions including the Pentagon and various corporations. However, the source article only says that he was accused of hacking these institutions. I think either less conclusive language or better sources would be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.186.182.181 (talk) 07:37, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. I made a note in the article stating that the AOL source does not include the preceding claims. Assange's exploits are nevertheless chronicled in other sources. We simply need to read them carefully and match appropriate sourcing to each statement in the prose. — JFG 23:51, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
- The content has to match the source, not an editors WP:OR on his exploits supposedly being well known. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2018
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change, "Julian Paul Assange (/əˈsɑːnʒ/; born Julian Paul Hawkins; 3 July 1971) is an Australian computer programmer, a fugitive, and the editor of WikiLeaks" to "Julian Paul Assange (/əˈsɑːnʒ/; born Julian Paul Hawkins; 3 July 1971) is an Australian born, Ecuadorian computer programmer, a fugitive, and the editor of WikiLeaks." This is because he now holds both citizenships. TimSeer1 (talk) 20:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Not done The information about his citizenship is already in the second paragraph of the lead. Do you have a source that shows that Assange considers himself or describes himself as Ecuadorian? – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Criticism of Guardian reporting and Assange's purported Trump criticism
An editor recently added a Guardian piece which alleges that Paul Manafort met with Assange. This was a report that was neither corroborated nor rejected by other RS. The edit opts to portray this as an "extraordinary claim" and inaccurately claims the "the article has been characterised as possibly journalism's biggest scoop of the year, or its biggest blunder." The edit then opts to cite Gleen Greenwald's cranky fringe view on the topic to suggest that the Guardian was motivated out of hatred towards Assange. The edit also adds undue text and changes to a header to suggest that Assange has been critical of both Hillary Clinton and Trump when Assange has almost exclusively railed on Clinton and the Democratic party while secretly advising the Trump campaign.
This was reverted, and then restored. The text should not be in the article. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 22:42, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Glenn Greenwald's view isn't "cranky" or "fringe." The only real question is whether any of this (Luke Harding's article and the various criticisms of it) are DUE. They might fall into the category of recent news that will quickly disappear, but the original story got a lot of attention when it first came out, as did the subsequent criticisms and skepticism directed towards it.
- As for whether or not Assange's statements should be labeled as criticism of Trump, I can't see how they're not criticism. Correct me if I'm wrong, but comparing a person (Trump in this case) to either "cholera" or "gonorrhea" is not meant as a compliment. We also quote Assange as saying that the Republicans have been hostile towards whistleblowers. How are these not criticisms of Trump and the Republican Party? -Thucydides411 (talk) 23:19, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- He refused to outright support Trump in public, but of course did so in private. And of course spent an entire election seeking to botch one candidate while propping up the other. It's absurd to describe him as a critic of Trump in a header. If you want a line about how he equivocated when asked who he supported, then add that. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:40, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Assange explicitly denies writing those messages.GPRamirez5 (talk) 00:00, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- He refused to outright support Trump in public, but of course did so in private. And of course spent an entire election seeking to botch one candidate while propping up the other. It's absurd to describe him as a critic of Trump in a header. If you want a line about how he equivocated when asked who he supported, then add that. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:40, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comparing someone to "cholera" or "gonorrhea" is negative. For the leader of Wikileaks, saying that a party is hostile to whistleblowers is a criticism. He clearly criticized Trump and the Republican party. -Thucydides411 (talk) 00:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Can someone explain the edit warring over the header? Did an old version of the section include criticism of the Dem party? D.Creish (talk) 01:58, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, before this edit, the section title was "Criticism of Clinton and the Democratic Party." There was an edit war over that entire edit (which changed several sections), but I thought that part of the edit was an obvious improvement, and reinserted it. Specifically, I reinserted the change to the section title and the inclusion of Assange's statement criticizing the Democratic and Republican parties' treatment of whistleblowers. The change to the section title is obvious - Assange compares both Clinton and Trump to terrible diseases. The inclusion of his criticism of both major parties seems relevant to the section as well. -Thucydides411 (talk) 02:09, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, that makes sense. I think the header change is uncontroversial. And I don't see why we shouldn't include Greenwald considering he's a legitimate journalist who's broken real stories when most content is written by underpaid 20-somethings with 'communications' degrees. D.Creish (talk) 02:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Low-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Australia articles
- Mid-importance Australia articles
- WikiProject Australia articles
- B-Class Journalism articles
- Mid-importance Journalism articles
- WikiProject Journalism articles
- B-Class International relations articles
- Mid-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- B-Class Sweden articles
- Low-importance Sweden articles
- All WikiProject Sweden pages
- B-Class Ecuador articles
- Low-importance Ecuador articles
- B-Class United Kingdom articles
- Low-importance United Kingdom articles
- WikiProject United Kingdom articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class Espionage articles
- Low-importance Espionage articles
- B-Class Computing articles
- Mid-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- Misplaced Pages In the news articles
- Misplaced Pages articles that use Australian English