Talk:Anke Vandermeersch
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group. | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Beauty Pageants, a WikiProject related to beauty pageants, their contestants and winners. |
Initially, she promised to pose nude for playboy magazine if she were to be elected, but it was not to be that year. She was elected in 2003 [1], so why didn't she pose? Intangible 17:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Video
I was wondering if we should add this external link:
Please discuss below.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- What is she saying ? What's the middle finger about ? --83.182.233.86 18:46, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- The video was hyped via email a couple of years back, which is why I think it is known enough to be encyclopedic. It shows a VB party congress where Anke speeches, saying "The next elections are about three topics; Flanders, safety, and immigrants (while showing here middle finger)." Note that a normal person counts the other way round, with the tumb being one, the index finger 2 and a the middle finger three. We'd probably have to put a language icon.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- Although interesting, it is a re-edit of her speech by some activists. So it cannot be added to Wikipedia. Intangible 15:53, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
- The video was hyped via email a couple of years back, which is why I think it is known enough to be encyclopedic. It shows a VB party congress where Anke speeches, saying "The next elections are about three topics; Flanders, safety, and immigrants (while showing here middle finger)." Note that a normal person counts the other way round, with the tumb being one, the index finger 2 and a the middle finger three. We'd probably have to put a language icon.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
These comments were previously posted on WikiProject Belgium.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh my... for those of you who don't speak Dutch : "The upcoming elections are about the three big v's : Flanders (=Vlaanderen),(pulls back one finger) safety (=veiligheid), (pulls back another finger, leaving only the middle finger extended) and the immigrants (=vreemdelingen)." I can see why you brought this up. I think there cannot be just a link. It has to be mentioned in the article as well then. But the fact that the video is rewinded at the end and zooms in makes it an anti-Vlaams Blok(/Belang) video, and I think supporters of the Vlaams Blok will say that Wikipedia should not link to "altered" footage for propaganda purposes. What do the others think?Evilbu 17:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Evilbu is quite right here. This might even be libel. Seeing the former beauty queen having an article, I wonder: Belgian Senate - Dutch electoral college: Staf Nimmegeers, Lionel Vandenberghe, Marc Van Peel ; French electoral college: Jean-Marie Happart, Philippe Moureaux. Red links for rather important politicians and some who had a notable politics-related public life before they became senators (unlike a few community senators that may have become senators mainly for their non-political well-known status). — SomeHuman 23 Oct 2006 23:09 (UTC)
- The article does not mention the fact that she used to be VLD, and gives a confusing account about this naked in Playboy business. We should concentrate on correcting that. On the other hand, reading the Dutch version, was her protest against the cordon sanitaire really the (only) reason for the VLD to dump her? The worst problem with Anke is of course that "ladderzat in de goot" - we cannot write that either, although the source is Vlaams Blok Magazine, oktober 1998. --Pan Gerwazy 00:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the editing of the speech makes it unpublishable, but I'm glad to see that other things can be improved.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 15:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- This is a rather irrelevant gaffe. Should Wikipedia include links to videos of Bushisms? I think not. Unless AV has a known record or such public mistakes it's totally irrelevant. --moyogo 19:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- I see your point but I don't think this is a mistake, I'm almost certain that this was very intentional to take things to yet another legal but keeping them barely acceptable at the same time. I think the video link should not be included... but IF the video wasn't edited and IF the Wikipedia article would mention the event as well .. then one could argue about this....Evilbu 22:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed. You can only argue about this if you have a reliable source (i.e. not some kind of activist web-site or so), that says this gaffe was actually intentional. Intangible 23:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
