Jump to content

Talk:Alice Weidel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ymblanter (talk | contribs) at 09:25, 31 December 2018 (→Ruckus at de-wiki). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Far-right politician

We have a reference saying that Weidel belongs to a far-right party. I do not see any reason to require a reference that she is a far-right politician. If there are some doubts she is a politician, may be that should be removed as unsourced, but this woyuld be really silly.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would leave out mention of her political position as it is controversial and unnecessary here. In reference to my controversial claim, please see the source below.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/23/german-anti-immigrant-afd-party-picks-leaders-election-drive/
'The less well known Ms Weidel is seen as a relative moderate within the AfD, and appears to have been nominated to placate party members alarmed by the choice of Mr Gauland'. The Telegraph. Published 23 April 2017. Retrieved 18 May 2017.
We should always be careful when placing controversial labels, especially on individuals, which may be seen as defamatory. I would like to see much more of a sourced, unanimous consciousness of her being far-right before we use this to describe her, especially in the opening paragraph. Also whether AfD is right-wing or far-right is controversial in of itself. Some sources claim it is a right-wing party, others far-right. Even if there was consensus for the party's political position (which as noted, there isn't) to then claim to know an individuals political position from within the party via this information is a WP:SYNTHESIS argument, and therefore should not stand. Helper201 (talk) 16:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
However, like it is now, saying just "politician" is also not really good. I would possibly agree with right-wing, though Merkel is right-wing as well, and there is, well, some difference between them.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many politicians on Wikipedia do not have a labelled position on their page, which is good as placing a political position accurately on an individual isn't usually an easy or non-controversial task. If you want to be more specific, a better way would be to outline her political views on different topics. Please also make sure to place the relevant citation at the end of the sentence for each claim (not refer to somewhere else in the article). Helper201 (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I may do this at some point, but it will take a lot of time. A short-term solution would be just to collect sources which call her far-right and right-wing and cite all of them. Thank you also for teaching me how to edit Wikipedia. This is particularly useful to hear from a user with 3K edits.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Section name: "Nazi slut" incident vs "Political correctness" incident

I recently changed the name of section "Nazi slut" incident to "Political correctness" incident. My edit was reverted with the explanation "But WP not censored. Need an argument to change this". My argument is that the purpose of the TV satire show host's comments were to show how extreme public discourse would be if "political correctness" were "put an end to", and that his actual comment is not relevant and also defamatory. Regardless of Weidel's political positions, giving undue weight to an offhand disparaging comment in this case I think violates WP:UNDUE, WP:IMPARTIAL, and WP:LIBEL. If we only consider WP:NOTCENSORED, a TV presenter could say for example, "Merkel is a Stalinist whore" and we would have to have that as a section name. Haben Sie einen guten Tag, Facts707 (talk) 10:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Not censored, but we have to be a bit sensitive, this is a WP:BLP. "Political correctness" incident is a preferable section heading. Or extra 3 incident or something that points to who she brought the suit against. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 14:56, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would call it "abuse controversy" or something like that. Political correctness is a bit tangential.Gaditano23 (talk) 17:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for the comments. I changed it to <TV show "political correctness" incident>. I think the presenter from "extra 3" made his point, but I think anyone could have made the point and so it's not necessary to give "extra 3" more visibility from it by having the show name in the section title. Cheers, Facts707 (talk) 13:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The English-language Reuters article cited has the title "AfD leader loses case versus German TV show that calls her 'Nazi bitch'". Someone had made this say "Nazi slut" instead of "Nazi bitch", which is incorrect. Sources have the titles they have, not the titles that Wikipedia editors think they ought to have.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:02, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring

A brand new account, User:Newuser867 is edit-warring at the talk page removing information supported by reliable sources.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:45, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

joined the party in 2012?

the AfD was founded in 2013! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BountyFlamor (talk • contribs) 19:29, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Children

The article claims that "They have two children". The wording seems unnecessarily confusing/ambiguous. As far as I understand, it isn't possible in Switzerland where those children live (and not in Germany either for that sake) for two women who live together to be legally recognised as parents for a child. So those children clearly have a father somewhere. Weidel has explicitly confirmed in an interview[1] that Bossard is the mother of the children, and that the children live with their mother in Switzerland, so the situation is clearly that she has a girlfriend who has two children, and that both the girlfriend and the girlfriend's children live in Switzerland, while Weidel herself primarily lives in Germany. It's fine to mention that, but it should be mentioned in a non-confusing way. --Jenimineto (talk) 09:27, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ruckus at de-wiki

Not sure if it made it into the mainstream press, but Weidela functionary under Weidel was at the center of a ruckus on German Wikipedia ArbCom in 2016. SheHe was an ArbCom member (MAGISTER (talk · contribs)) for years, and outed herhimself at some point, which caused multiple ArbCom members to resign; or better said, numerous ArbCom members resigned without giving a reason right after her identity as a major Afd figure was made clear to ArbCom. The mass resignation left ArbCom with fewer members than a quorum, so it basically self-destructed and conducted no more business that session. Mathglot (talk) 08:18, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The user says they are from Wismar, and Weidel is not from Wismar by any reasonable reading. This means that the user clearly does not idetify themselved with Weidel, and one would need a body of reliable sources to add this to the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, it wasn't Weidel, but someone working under her (and male) The fall-out was most visible afterward on this page starting with #3. I'll see if I can find the smoking gun, but if there are no outside sources, the whole issue is moot anyway.
Bullet 2 at conv #10 on that page summarizes it, but isn't a proof. Still looking. Mathglot (talk) 09:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see, but the name has not been mentioned, and we need external sources anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:25, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alice_Weidel&oldid=876125404"