Talk:Ernst Zündel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Fascism, an attempt to better organize and unify articles relating to the fascist ideology, its impact on history and present-day organizations closely linked to both of these (ideology and history). See project page, and discussion.
This article may be listed on an index of fascist movements or people. Such listing may be controversial; feel free to contribute to discussions there. The presence of this Talk page-only template only implies that the subject is of interest to the associated WikiProject. |
[edit] Quote section
This quote section contains numerous cherry-picked quotes in what seems to me an attempt to paint the subject in a certain light. How necessary is this section? Shouldn't this just be merged into the article? It seems to violate Wikipedia's NPOV policy pretty badly to me. Some of these violate context pretty blatantly, for example - Zündel has presented himself delivering warnings to the Jews, not making threats to them as the holocaust quote would imply, for example. And how would you "balance" it? By just adding more quotes? What a mess, just merge them into the article if they are really that necessary.
I've deleted it once with this reasoning before, however it was simply restored. :bloodofox: 03:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
The quotations do not express the views of any editor or any source other than Zundel himself. I don't see an NPOV issue. Gazpacho 07:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's the SELECTION of the quotes that are the problem. Selecting specific quotes can give an impression - it's context. I've since removed the quotes in question. If you need to use them, work them into the article, otherwise you're pushing the NPOV limits. :bloodofox: 04:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deportation update
This probably needs inclusion in the artical somehow considering it's relevance. It's the ruling that Zundel was deported under. Although the ruling is suspended for one year current detainees have been granted bail and are free to leave the country.
"Canada's Supreme Court struck down a controversial anti-terror law on Friday (23/02/2007) that allows foreign suspects to be detained indefinitely without trial on the basis of secret evidence. The court ruled unanimously that the government had broken the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by issuing so-called security certificates to imprison people, pending deportation, without giving them a chance to see the government's case. The court suspended the ruling for a year to allow Parliament time to rewrite the relevant part of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act -- under which the certificates are issued. The Supreme Court ruling said one way to improve the system of certificates would be to appoint a special advocate to challenge the security evidence." (c) Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Wayne 22:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
The above information - deported using an unconstitutional law, would fit in nicely at the end of the "detention and deportation" section of the article. I believe Zundel was hustled out of the country while this law was being questioned. 159.105.80.63 17:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
The article mentions that he lost both constitutional challenges - I believe a rewrite is in order ( he won both eventually - maybe only the last? ). No mention either of the invaluable aid given by the US government in withholding evidence that he was not a security threat - give credit where it is due. Also the Canadian government helped by withholding evidence as long as they could - bravo ( I think they were hoping the old guy would die in solitary but he just wouldn't ). Both governments acted like they were under severe pressure but we all know that can't be true.159.105.80.63 18:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
In the article it mentions that the West German government notified the Canadian Jewish Council of Zundel's publishing. Do governments usually notify various Jewish Councils if they want something done? What did the Jewish Council do - do they have an official role in Canadian government affairs?159.105.80.141 15:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Why was the ban on his mailing lifted in 1983 - was it an illegal ban? The eventual overturning of bans, convictions, etc against Zundel in Canada by the Supreme Court seems to point to pressure on the government from someone ( CJC maybe?). You article in being partial fair to a close reader may undo itself - who edited this by leaving in some facts and still keeping the shrill(there is probably a better word, accusatory maybe) tone - bravo.159.105.80.141 15:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Do any of these articles ever get redone - uncited garbage seems to take precedence over facts. Editors who state that an article needs to be improved - toward the truth - get ignored. Even discussion pages get altered if they get too uncomfortable. Good work.159.105.80.141 18:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
No mention of his house being firebombed. No arresets I believe. No investigation? Maybe that it why he left Canada - RCMP seemed to be unable to act. Did Irving have similar problems? The dangerous deniers seem to get burned, beaten, etc by those nice liberals at will.159.105.80.141 14:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- So fix it. Provide reliable, verifiable sources, and present them with a neutral point of view, and it will improve the article. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
