Talk:Carmelo Borg Pisani

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All right, boys or girls. This article has been written by me - A FOREIGNER, NON-MALTESE - as in that time Maltese contributors looked like very profoundly sleeping - sorry - dogs. Why I wrote it ? Try to answer a simple question first : Who were Maltese men or women who could be truly called "big", "heroes", "whose place in the Maltese history is secure" ? Ehm. A problem, don't you think ?! That's why C.Borg Pisani was included there by me. We cannot measure or change history according todays' fashion, it's impossible to change it. Well, C.B.Pisani wanted to change one colonial ruler for another one (and that's also speculation - if Malta became "provincia italiana", it could be in the same league as Sicily is. Take my words according to your taste but, please, take also into account the he paid for his ideas by his life. Write revision, if you wish, I leave it in your hands now. And controversy - you should know better than me that IT STILL IS ALIVE in Malta. Radoneme 20:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)Radoneme, Oct. 29th, 2006

OK, I see the NPOV issues. Seems like it could be cleaned up, give the facts, give the viewpoints, etc. Srl 09:13, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comment on Copysan's edits

Hi, to be Frank I don't see the point why you have to remove good faith evidence of Oral Source. Ever heard of Oral History? So do you think by cluttering the page with {{fact}} that that really does much good? - by those standards you could clutter 90% of wikipedia articles in that way. If you had, in a consequent manner, pursued such noble intentions you might have added the references I gave in situ to the footnotes (the mentioned book has no ISBN since ISBN was introduced in Malta much later).

I'm not sure how much research on the topic you have done yourself: CBP is still one those sensitive topics in Maltese History a) due to how we interpret British Colonial rule b) due to the Involvement of the Nationalist Party with facism.

Not much has been written - and whatever might have been written must - in the best of cases - be carefully interpreted. At this stage it's simply getting people to gather Information. There surely are NPOV issues with the Links, but IMHO not with the article itself. --Joelemaltais 23:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for your constructive criticism.
Oral history is allowed when it is documented and verified. Please see WP:NOR and WP:RS. I do not know the credentials of the grandfather, and it was not given, therefore, I cannot count hims a reliable source. Cluttering the page with {{fact}} allows readers to see that the assertions have not been verified, and if I had the time, I would go through many articles adding those tags. All it says is "citation needed" and if you wish to provide those citations (in accordnace with WP:RS), then it is perfectly alright.
If you look at my edits, all I did was rearrange the article to make it flow more logically and redid the prose. The facts were not changed nor deleted. Any information that was there is still there.
What I did delete, was the editors commentary. "I would not put it this way" is commentary, and does not belong in an encyclopedia article. The reference to "I" in this case means Wikipedia, and Wikipedia does not make judgements (WP:NPOV), nor should an editor self references (WP:ASR). Although, I do admit, taking a second look at the footnote I deleted, I could have weaved that observation about the Maltese Exiles into the text of the article. And I will do that right now.
Any other specific things you want to point out? Please reply here, and if you don't mind, leave a note on my talk page saying that you have replied. (Although you don't have to, It's on my watchlist)
Thanks. Copysan 01:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello again - thanks for speedy turnaround. I see your point and do admit that I concentrated on content without checking coherence as a whole and I suppose that contibuted to your modifying relevant content:

I would not put it this way. The fascists in Malta were at that time either interned in Uganda or deported to Italy. I suppose, that it is rather the case of fear of natural empathy towards a co-national.

The sentence is in fact very badly formulated on my part, but very relevant: If you consider that after the war the traitors put to trial (mentioned in the other quote) were not condemned to death, you can conclude that the British overreacted with CBP in an extreme wartime situation i.e It is important to emphasize that this event (putting cbp to the gallows) is not an overall reflection the colonial relationship. I'll try and get the sources - very difficult since I'dont live im Malta ;))--Joelemaltais 18:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I doubt the British overreacted. Killing off traitors and spies is normal all over the world. The Malta Facisists were probably deported for being facisists, and not killed because nobody ever proved them to be spying. But thats just my opinon, not that of some reputed sources. Copysan 20:27, 9 May 2006 (UTC)