Talk:Nikolaos Michaloliakos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Sources

Not a single source for this article is in English. That is problematic. --SandyDancer 19:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

That's because no sources about Michaloliakos exist in English. Mitsos 19:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Then we have verifiability problems and maybe the article shouldn't be on Wikipedia - too many the sources you have come up with seem to be the website of Hrisi Avgi. Sources from extremist websites are not generally considered reliable. --SandyDancer 20:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia policy against non-English sources. Mitsos 20:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

HA's sources are always used together with neutral sources, except from 4 sentences that talk about uncontroversial things such as were he studied (except from two sentence). Do you think that the article must be taged because of two sentences? Mitsos 20:19, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't read the sources because they are in Greek. They are used to evidence claims you are making which I have no independent verification for. Your record on the Hrisi Avgi article suggests to me you are a partisan editor - sorry about that, but I may as well be honest. --SandyDancer 20:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

If you don't trust me, ask the opinion of another Greek editor. Mitsos 21:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

The problem here is with verifiability - here we have an article about a fringe figure in Greek far-right politics, written by yourself, a self-declared Nazi, using only Greek language sources on English Wikipedia, many of which seem to come from far-right sources, often the Hrisi Avgi party itself. --SandyDancer 13:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no WP policy against Nazi editors, and there is no WP policy against Greek sources. I have explained about biased sources, if you don't want to understand that's your problem. Mitsos 15:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Michaloliakos

Your edits were lost during an edit conflict. They are OK, and you may re-add them without reverting me. I reverted you again because I have provided many sources and you deleted them. Mitsos 19:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

It is not up to you to tell me my edits are "OK". I have now added those edits FOUR three times and every time you have reverted them. Don't be so disingenuous to suggest this was an edit conflict - each time you have deliberately done it. --SandyDancer 19:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Four times???? Give me a break. I can re-add your edits if you want, but don't revert me. Mitsos 19:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I have restored them myself, leaving your (biased) sources in. Do not revert again. Answer me this - why was it necessary to revert my edits - which you now so you have no problem with - when adding sources? Why does adding information necessitate reverting totally separate edits? --SandyDancer 19:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Because when I saw we were in an edit conflict I was bored to re-add my edits to your version. I know this doesn't sounds good, but I type really slow and it is quite boring to me. Mitsos 20:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

OK. Fair enough. --SandyDancer 20:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disbandment

Mitsos can you please explain why you have such an issue with the introduction stating that the Hrisi Avgi party was disbanded in 2005? Surely it just makes things clearer for the reader - what is your sensitivity here? --SandyDancer 21:59, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

It's because in the intro, we must describe Michaloliakos briefly, and not give further information about HA. The fact that it is disbanded is mentioned elsewhere in the article. Mitsos 09:32, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

It helps to set set some kind of chronology for the article, and is only five words. Am reinserting. --SandyDancer 13:22, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

We already state that the party is defunct and this article is about Michaloliakos, not Hrisi Avgi. The fact that it was disbanded in 2005 is mentioned elsewhere. Mitsos 15:21, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

What is your sensivity about this? Why are you willing to edit war about something which surely isn't controversial? Do you just enjoy edit warring?

Saying the party was disbanded in '05 is a key fact and gives the reader and idea about the chronology of the subject's career. He was a leader of a political party until 2005 - then he ceased to be one. Here are some examples of other former political party leader articles: Iain Duncan Smith, Neil Kinnock, Michael Howard, Jeremy Thorpe... in each casethe intro paragraph tells you when they ceased to be leader of a party.

Here, the party was abolished in 2005 - surely that is one of the most important dates in Michaloliakos' life? What is he notable for, if not notable for having been leader of Hrisi Avgi? What is the problem with stating that the party was abolished in 2005? --SandyDancer 20:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)