Talk:Jarosław Kaczyński

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

Contents

[edit] Old talk

Is it right for wikipedia to claim someone as gay in spite of their own convictions? Has it any founding at all this claim? And is it right for wikipedia to take such a stance in the discussions of weather homosexuality is a choise or a nature of someone from birth?

This seems to have been already taken care of. Gdabski 20:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

He lives with his widowed mother, Jadwiga Kaczyńska.- what does it mean - isnt it aliitle bit strange, i dont get it?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.76.37.142 (talk • contribs) .

Yes, his mother lives with him, what's strange about that? He takes care of his elderly parent. Whether it matters enough to be put in the article is another story. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.156.21.6 (talk • contribs) .

The strange thing for me is not that he cares for his aging mother-this is, in fact, commendable-the disturbing thing is that he is likely to become the next Head of Government at the same time that his identical twin brother is (and will be) the Head of State. Will the two brothers be able to seperate their duty to Poland from their fraternal bond with each other? I highly doubt it. What happens if there comes a time where Poland's best interests are in direct conflict with the desires of either of these two siblings? Neither one could be expected to ignore their personal relationship to each other in favour of their professional relationship to Poland, and yet, that is exactly what must be expected of them if they are to hold the positions being discussed. Wandering Star 18:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

What are you talking about? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.156.21.6 (talk • contribs) .

I don't think he actually has that much time to care for his mother, but she doesn't seem to be that much of an ailing person yet to require special care. Anyway, let's not get political here, this is about creating a factually accurate article.
Also, please do not remove information on the "anthem incident", this was one of the major media issues involving Jarosław Kaczyński, which might have shaped his image in the view of many members of the public, given how much media time was devoted to it. It also spurned many populr jokes, spoofs etc. and became one of the most "inspiring" moments in Polish popular culture this year. It should by no means be overlooked. Bravada, talk - 18:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


Media hyped this and it's not a "major issue." NOBODY talks about it now, it's a minor thing that happened, got some play and it's over. If you want to bring up controversy then please do but giving the anthem incidenty any play THEN add a clip in Polish that nobody understands is really not helpful to anyone but shows that you have an axe to grind. Why do you insist on this? It's obvious you have a negative POV on J. Kaczynski.

Unless you plan to add other "controvesial issues" the whole section looks VERY incomplete. If you want to leave this biased tidbit, then better do the legwork to bring something substantial up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.156.21.6 (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Two points: 1. Gay comment, and 2. JFK and RFK

As far as Wikipedia "asserting" that someone is gay--the best rule of thumb for that is (or should be):

if the person identifies himself/herself as gay, then the Wiki article may do so (and site the reliable, verifiable source);

if the person has made no verifiable statement (remains silent), then Wikipedia should probably remain silent (or site reliable, verifiable sources that maintain he is gay--and let the debate begin).

Now--has everyone forgotten about JFK and RFK? They were not twins, but they were 2 brothers who were in very powerful political positions (U.S. President and U.S. Attorney General). They did very well, in my view, even during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

By the way, can everyone PLEASE sign your comments? Please? Thank you. :) User:ProfessorPaul 19:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I see a difference between the role of the US Attorney General and the role of Prime Minister in Poland. The system Poland uses is fundamentally different that the one we use in the US. In our system, the Head of Government and the Head of State are always the same person. But in Poland, they are not, and the two parties are expected to keep each other from overstepping their limits. The Head of State, while lacking the powers weilded by the PM, may dismiss the Head of Government if the Prime Minister abuses their power. The AG, on the other hand, cannot fire the President of the US. Thus, one cannot compare JFK/RFK to the Kaczynski Brothers. QED

Now, considering the checks and balances of the Polish system, is there not a conflict of interest when the President and the Prime Minister are of the closest possible familial relation to one another?

And yes, I do agree that everyone should sign their comments. Wandering Star 23:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if political discussions and such would be held elsewhere, in a more appropriate place. This is where we should discuss the article, otherwise it might get both nasty and useless. Thanks! Bravada, talk - 23:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the part "family life", which refers to Kaczynski living with his mother and a cat. This seemed to me utterly pointless, and Discourteous. I have looked at articles on other polititians and none have sub-headings about family, and none refer to pets. _zsuetam

What is discourteous about mentioning that he cares for his aging mother? If anything, that's pointing out a rather positive quality in him. I wish more people would continue to care for their aging parents after they have become rich and powerful.Wandering Star 19:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nomination

The article says he was nominated in passive voice more than once. In some Parliamentary systems, the President nominates the PM. Is this the case in Poland? If not, who does? --Dhartung | Talk 05:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Formally, I believe that's the case in Poland, though, IIRC, the Parliament is to present a candidate to the President. The thing is that Kaczyński told Marcinkiewicz to resign on Friday evening, and later on Saturday his party nominated him as their PM candidate in some internal voting (there was no Parliament session in the meantime so that neither decision is official by law). Moreover, it was actually more of Kaczyński decision accepted by his colleagues, but I didn't want to delve into so much detail while writing this. Bravada, talk - 08:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
So it looks like this wasn't the same as the process of forming a new government -- the PiS (?) is still the governing party, but they have switched leaders. --Dhartung | Talk 20:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay

It is a public rumour in Poland that Jaroslaw Kaczynski is gay, and to divert any suspicion he indulges in anti-gay rethoric. I think that Wikipedia should mention the fact, but clearly add that this is a roumour.

BTW I'm Polish

Kazimierz

Is that the former Prime Minister taking revenge? :D
I don't think it should, there are also many public rumors that given politicians acquired property or money in dishonest ways, were or are agents of former communist or existing Polish or foreign secret services, are in fact of other than Polish ancestry etc. We don't discuss all those rumors, as this would make WP a gossip column with no claims to NPOV.
It just occured to me that research indicates that identical twins usually share sexual orientation (and the correlation is really strong). From the information we have we can infer that Lech is heterosexual - he has a wife and a daughter, and actually no rumors like that were ever circulating about him. Why would then Jarosław be gay, other that he never married? Some people are so consumed by their other cravings that they do not engage in sexual activity at all.
Anyway, this would be inappropriate to discuss it in the article. I am not a fan of Jarosław and would not like to turn this article into a shrine in his honour, but I guess we should stick with the facts. Bravada, talk - 10:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not certain as to why anyone should even care what his sexual preference is. Would it be so bad if he were gay? Why is being gay, or being percieved as gay, something to be ashamed of? And why would anyone think it was something so awful that the mere implication of it could be seen as an insult of some kind? By reacting so negatively, aren't you in fact saying something about the way you think about gay people? Both the idea that being said to be gay is negative, or that saying someone is gay is a way to defame them, implies that you believe that there is something wrong with being gay. In short, your protestations and accusations make you look like a bigot. Wandering Star 21:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Being gay is nothing to be ashamed of, I wouldn't say "on the contrary" as it would require people like me to wear pink T-shirts and scream "Hi honey!" all the time, but the thing is that Kaczyński is the leader of the political option and coalition often voicing quite homophobic remarks, which can make such rumors quite amusing. The rumor has actually been circulating much longer than when Jarosław adopted such political stance, but this is why it is getting more attention now. Still, I believe it does not have a place in the article. Bravada, talk - 22:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I see that an WP article shouldn't be a playground for speculations. But what about sources? I found this article of an internet paper. Not sure how reliable this source is. However in the article it is mentiones that both Wyborcza Gazeta as well as TVN24 ran the story as well. Does anyone have more information on this? --Chakalacka 23:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
he is gay? Seriously?? Sources for a gay polish prime minister?--Tresckow 10:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Still no polish or mainstream sources for this but here another quite detailed article that may help in the research... http://www.gcn.ie/content/templates/newsupdate.aspx?articleid=1370&zoneid=4 --62.136.195.226 13:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prime Minister or not

On 10 June, Kaczyński was APPOINTED as the new Prime Minister, but has not been SWORN IN. He now needs to assemble a cabinet and undergo a confidence vote in the Parliament for that to happen. Until then, Marcinkiewicz remains in office. Polish speakers might see a proof in a video of Lech Kaczyński's speech after the appointment, where it's apparent even he has problems distinguishing between Prime Minister and President now that he and his twin brother are to be both -> [1] Bravada, talk - 15:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Controversial incidents involving Jarosław Kaczyński

I'm removing this section. The fact that Kaczyński cannot sing nicely is not notable enough to make it into an encyclopedic article about a prime minister. This is not a "controversial incident", either. Encyclopedia is not a tabloid. --Lysytalk 20:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Lysy, I appreciate your sympathy for our new Prime Minister, but, if as I assume you live in Poland, you can only agree that this event had a massive media coverage, and spun off a major wave of discussions and satire. A leader of a party that won the elections on a nationalist-populist ticket who cannot sing his country's own national anthem's (this is not inability to sing - this is simply not knowing the melody, let alone lyrics) is a rather striking phenomenon. I haven't heard about such incident anywhere in the world, and I am sure media would have made it front page news if Tony Blair or George Bush were found unable to sing their countries' anthems. This incident has surely shaped the perception of Jarosław in view of many members of the public, and has significantly influenced the Polish popular culture.
If you'd take a look at Bill Clinton's or Prince Philip's articles, you would find that Paula Jones or the Duke of Edinburgh's embarassing blunders are discussed there, not to mention a whole section devoted to satire in Tony Blair's article. This is only a "stub" of a section, Jarosław is a rather controversial figure and there is much more that would belong there. This is not my primary interest on WP, so forgive me for not devoting more time to expanding it, but I guess as Jarosław's profile rises, there will be an inceasing number of editors interested in expanding this article.
Please do not try to "cleanse" articles in order to make subjects look better. Bravada, talk - 22:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Not at all, it did not get a massive media coverage, nothing more than a day's fad. I don't see it mentioned in media any more. Also, the section is mis-titled. I do not see any controversy here, as I've not heard anyone claiming that Kaczyński sings beautifuly. Finally, a personal request: can you not attribute me the sympathy for the Prime Minister, if you please. I'm only trying to make it into a better quality article. --Lysytalk 22:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
A week's rather than day's I'd say. I think the congress was on Saturday, and I've heard overtones of it in the media the following weekend. It was the top subject of jokes and derision in all sorts of publications and programs, and I do not mean only the joke columns, but also politicians and commentators relating to that incident. And if you listened to people discussing Jarosław's nomination for PM in the media, you'd hear them also referring to this incident.
Perhaps the title is not the best, but if a leader of the majority party, who proclaimed himself and ardent patriot and whatnot, is found singing the national anthem worse than a below-average elementary school pupil, is that NOT controversial? I would say it's also embarassing and quite apalling, given how he went on to become Prime Minister, but I guess these are far too POV descriptions. If you can find a better title for this section, please apply it. Bravada, talk - 22:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I think that's it - thanks a lot! Though now Barry Kent has reverted a lot for no apparent reason... Bravada, talk - 23:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

In response to Pawel z Niepolomic changing the content of this section, I would like to note that this was not just a minor slip of tongue. If it was so, there would be no "extensive media scrutiny" and this would have become a minor memo, probably not even making it to mainstream news. Perhaps somebody can dig out the Wiadomości report (whose later consequences makes this matter even more significant), which showed that average elementary school pupils can sing the anthem more or less correctly melodically, and the mistake is regarded as fairly basic. So I believe there is no reason to try to downplay this rather embarassing performance by the future PM. Bravada, talk - 17:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC) PS. Pawel, please note that the regular English Wikipedia user will not be able to understand the meaning of the mistake, let alone probably even pronounce the line. It is therefore pretty useless to delve into detail - what is important is that this was a major mistake, and that it was committed by a person being elected to a very high-ranking public office on a nationalist ticket.

Sorry but we don't mirror the overly-intense media scrutiny and criticism found in Polish tabloids in Wikipedia as we have to abide by Wikipedia:NPOV policies, just give represantations of cold, hard facts. So whether he sang in a minor or major or whatever isnt as relevant as the actual empirical tongue slip. Pawel z Niepolomic 18:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Ummm... is it okay to remove the bad singing and the duck thing (what's controversial about that anyway?) now as it's not timely and hardly relevant? I guess the ZOMO reference is a bit more serious so it could stay. Objections? radek 22:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This page is bad joke or what?

This article is far below Wikipedia quality standards. Wikipedia is not a collection of long-forgotten anegdotes about tabloid articles and singing. Current page is more fit to Uncyclopedia or Polish talboid "Nie". I understand that some users feel strongly against Kaczynski, but Wikipedia is not a place of childish jokes.

I agree, the article is horrible, I tried to clean it of the singing "scandal" nonsense, but those with axe to grind keep reverting. Can't help it, negative POV seems to reign. Internet "kids" are very liberal and Kaczynski rubs them the wrong way.


This article is below any acceptable standards, dear children please stay out of Wikipedia!

I can agree with you, this article is stil very bad.

[edit] Unprofessional aspects of this article

First, let me state that I came here because of a notice at the LGBT board, so my critique will be from that perspective. There are several issues that stand out in what otherwise seems to be a fine, if incomplete, piece. First of all the "suspicion" of romantic involvement in the intro is an obvious beard and not up to standards. Secondly, the repeated reverts of the categorization are inappropriate, since the article obviously needs to be linked to an LGBT category, based on the text itself. So I would like to open this to discussion to see if there is a category that we can all agree upon. Is the parent category, Category:LGBT acceptable, and if not it, then which? Haiduc 14:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I have re-added the LGBT tag. This is sourced material, and obviously falls under the LGBT project umbrella. While some editors may not be comfortable with the man's sexuality, that is no reason to expunge facts about him that are sourced from the record. Jeffpw 15:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think the sourced material is strong enough given WP:BLP. There have been quite srtong accusations of homosexuality but nothing really conclusive. Also most of the coverage is from gay news sources, not from general international news organisations. Short of having a Category:People accused of being LGBT, I don't think this one qualifies. WJBscribe 15:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
By that logic we should discount philatelic information from sites specializing in stamps, and astronomical information from sites focusing on space. Haiduc 15:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
The reason only gay sites have been used as references is that they are the only english language sources that have written about it (that I can see). Both sources reference the Polish news accounts. I wish we could get those as references, but I have no reason to doubt that the sources cited would claim a major Polish newspaper has written this without having checked it. Jeffpw 15:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Haiduc, its not really the same thing at all. LGBT sites have an agenda in publicisng such claims which leaves them open to being found partisan. In this instance, the fact that the strongly anti-gay Polish Prime Minister proved to be gay himself would attrack considerable outside interest. One would expect comment from most major news organisations. Lack of such comment is, in my view, problematic. We can just about confirm that some Polish newspapers have reported this. But in my view we cannot say that Jarosław Kaczyński is gay, just that he is believed to be so my certain groups in Poland. WJBscribe 15:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Mmm. I think what may be an issue here is that we are hampered by the fact that we do not dpeak Polish. This article says that Poland's second largest newspaper published documents from the Polish Secret Service discussing Jaroslav's homosexuality - which seems equivalent to the Washington Post publishing CIA Secret Service documents about George Bush's sexuality. The article also points out that Poland has a culture of not discussing politician's private lives, so that may also contribute to the silence here. We have Polish WikiProject members - I'll contact Boyau and ask him to weigh in. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:35, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

While I find the exclusion of sites specializing in LGBT information indefensible, I will agree that it may be premature to label him as being gay, but since the article certainly is of interest to the LGBT discourse we should categorize it under LGBT proper. It would be better to have an LGBT current events category, but failing that, the parent category will do. Haiduc 17:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Might it be worth creating a Category:Anti-gay activists? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Per my comment here, unless those revelations can be verified by more reliable sources then the three minor and POVed sites, per WP:BLP we should not include the highly dubious tabloid-level speculation in the article.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  21:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, one of those minor POV sites says that the story started when Rzeczpolita published secret service documentation - this does not seem dubious to me. And Rzeczpolita is in Polish, so I can't verify it without learning another language. Can you try? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I couldn't find any references to that article, but I admit I am not following current Polish political life closely. Hopefully some other(s) Polish Wikipedians will be more up to date with that issue, but based on what I know it seems quite dubious (like a tabloid 'revelation').-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Ugh, this is complete BS and misinformation. The documents involved are from Lesiak Group files-this were people who were given orders to destroy right-wing opposition in the early 90s, the files only contain orders to spread such rumours and to find as much about his sexuality as possible. He is single because of his work as dissident, he had a girlfriend but they decided he was too absorbed with politics to start a family life that she desired. If somebody's interested : http://www.warsawvoice.pl/view/12722/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by StartrailPL (talk • contribs).

That only says that they were snoping around for information, not that they were making it up. What about Lech's crack that some dude came with his wife and Jaraslaw came with his husband? (I'm using first names because I can't spell their last ones.) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed section about Jaroslaw remarks and the source

  • As far as I am concerned, it was Lech who stated:"

Prezydent Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej Lech Kaczyński, określił homoseksualizm jako zagrożenie oświadczając: Rasa ludzka wyginęłaby, jeśli promowalibyśmy homoseksualizm . http://hrw.org/polish/docs/2007/03/16/poland15514.htm "Human race will extinct, if we promoted homosexuality"

  • Jaroslaw said"Jeśli ktoś jest homoseksualistą, który zajmuje się propagowaniem homoseksualizmu, to rzeczywiście nie powinien być nauczycielem" -

http://www.edu.edu.pl/info/info_show_details.php?i=6936 If somebody is homosexual who is occupied with homosexual propaganda, he really shouldn't be a teacher"

The source that make wrong citation seems to me mostly unreliable.

Cautious 22:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chairman of the Council of Ministers or PM

I think we should put back the phrase Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland. Even though it's not official name of that office, it's much more often used and may be better understood by foreigners EPWA airport 10:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Doctor of law

I added an information that Kaczyński is a Doctor of law

[edit] Concerning: Controversial incidents

To Medard: You removed twice my contribution to this article concerning Controversial incidents involving Jarosław Kaczyński. First time without any comment, last time at least with a statement. Unfortunately, I don't understand what you want to express and why you are criticizing my contribution. Are you considering Tagesschau as a non-serious, yellow press source? It's together with heute Germany's most reputative, serious and trustworthy news broadcast. And what do you want to express with your reference to Welt Online? I don't see any relation to my contribution. Please explain me your point of view, maybe we can get to a common understanding.

[edit] Controversial incidents involving Jaroslaw Kaczynski

I feel strongly that the aforementioned section is defamatory and a complete joke. He sang 'incredibly' badly? I think the word incredibly is difficult to use if you were not there. Why is the rubber duck incident controversial? The 'incident' just sounds like a political ploy and gimmick. I think it is also unfair to class his beliefs as 'strong anti-homosexual rhetoric'. I would hope that this is appropriate edited, as there is little point doing it myself, as almost certainly it will be reverted.

AlexSloan 18:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

You are right, all politicians say weird things on many occasions, Kaczynski is not better or worse. This whole section should be removed. Tymek (talk) 19:52, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT

It is a fact that communist secret services were checking Jaroslaw Kaczynski for his alleged being gay, but no results of their work have been revealed. The purpose of it was to discredit Kaczynski, an active member of opposition. So, all we have are baseless rumors and I frankly have no idea why he is within the scope of LGBT project. Tymek (talk) 20:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, the investigation by the secret service started in 1992. I was not aware of the fact that Poland was still a communist country at that point. Anyway, its not just that investigation. Lech Walesa claims the same and a number of newspapers like Wyborcza Gazeta have reported about the claims. This article gives the impression that other politians suspect the same... 160.91.64.252 (talk) 03:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Frankly, in 1992 Poland officially was no longer a Communist country, but its secret services were as Communist as possible. Anyway, all I mean is that rumors should not be basis for our work here. Tymek (talk) 19:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Presence of rumours is a notable subject I would say. Malick78 (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Malick, are you joking or are you serious? Have you seen an encyclopedia based on rumors? Tymek (talk) 19:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Tom Cruise#Litigation related to gay rumors for instance. One rumour is not notable, hundreds of rumours repeated for years is. Especially if it is related to a politician's policies (PIS is anti-gay) and could suggest hypocrisy. Malick78 (talk) 10:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Malick, let us be serious. If you want to base articles on rumors, please start Rumor-Encyclopedia. What if your whole school talks behind your back that you eat dog's poo? And this rumor is repeated for four years by everybody? Please be serious, and this is not funny any more. Tymek (talk) 15:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
It's a fact that there are rumours. Ask a friend with at least one matura to explain that to you. Malick78 (talk) 15:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
It is a fact that he was checked, read some history and be polite. When police check if you are/are not a thief, it does not mean that you are one. I do not care if Kaczynski is gay or not. All I want is a credible source, not baseless rumors. Tymek (talk) 19:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

"Speculation about the sexuality of the Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski has long been a hot topic in Poland and last October, on TVN's "Teraz My" ("Now Us") program, former President Lech Walesa confirmed to anchors Tomasz Sekielski and Andrzej Morozowski what he said more than 10 years before when he was interviewed live on TVP, the state television channel and discussing a birthday party he held while in office. When asked who came, President Walesa said that he invited Lech Kaczynski and his wife and Jaroslaw Kaczynski and his husband. Neither one of the twins attended. This followed revelations last fall in Gazeta Wyborcza and Rzeczpospolita that the Polish Secret Service had in 1992 undertaken an investigation to find out the identity of Jaroslaw Kaczynski's significant other, and if the relationship was stable. The Secret Service in the Communist regime also investigated Jaroslaw Kaczynski and papers published in the Polish press say that he was not interested in meeting women, per se. When Walesa made his original comments on television a decade ago Jaroslaw Kaczynski said he wanted to sue but because Walesa was the head of state at the time, he was immune from such action. When Walesa repeated the allegations in October 2006, when he was out of office and no longer immune, there was no reaction from Jaroslaw Kaczynski."

From the Krakow Post. Obviously there's no confirmation that he's gay (and I've never said he is) but the topic is definitely worth a mention, especially when it involves ex-Presidents and threatened legal action. Cf. Tom Cruise above. Malick78 (talk) 20:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

You are not Polish, as I pressume, and perhaps you do not know that Walesa is known for his hatred of the twins, and he uses any possible way to defame them, including baseless accusations and personal attacks. Anyway, I follow Polish mass-media and speculations about his alleged homosexuality are not as frequent as a pro-gay foreigner might think. And off-topic question - how many maturas a friend of mine must have to provide me with information? Tymek (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Foreigners aren't really "pro-gay" - they're "pro-human". It's a subtlety the twins will never understand. As for this debate, I feel the two of us will go round in circles here, so can someone else comment? Malick78 (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
This was just a baseless rumour by his opponents connected to operations of former communist intelligence to discredit him. Nothing deserving the project.--Molobo (talk) 01:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
If you're right, then this conspiracy to defame him is notable itself:) Do you have any sources we can use? Or was it just a guess? ;) Malick78 (talk) 06:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

"On April 11, 2008 the Russian newspaper Moskovsky Korrespondent reported that Vladimir Putin and his wife Lyudmila had been divorced for some time. According to the tabloid, Putin plans to marry the 24-year old former Olympic gymnast Alina Kabaeva in June. The information allegedly came from a "close friend" of the head of a wedding company. Kabayeva's spokeswoman refused to discuss "this nonsense"[233]. As Putin was abroad at the time, and the Kremlin declined to comment, the rumour spread into serious newspapers and television broadcasts all over the world, until on April 18, 2008 Putin himself denied the entire story at a press conference with Silvio Berlusconi, saying: "There is not a single word of truth" to the report". "I have always had a negative opinion of those who, with their snotty noses and their erotic fantasies, meddle in other people's lives," he added. [234][235]"

From Putin's page on WP. The case for mentioning rumours and then stating they haven't been proved is quite clear. It is POV to not mention them. Malick78 (talk) 07:25, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mother and salary

A question - which of the brothers admitted paying his salary to his mother because he didn't trust banks?? This is notable since paying money over a certain amount to a relative incurs tax in Poland and therefore there were suggestions the brother in question hadn't paid it. Surely it was Jaroslaw, the unmarried brother? Malick78 (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

This is notable for a blog, not for an encyclopedia. Tymek (talk) 19:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
The Prime Minister of a country not trusting its banking system and possible avoiding paying taxes isn't notable? It's definitely notable because it was all over the Polish media for weeks last year. Malick78 (talk) 10:28, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Possible avoiding paying taxes. And this is encyclopedic material for you? Please, start a blog and write about possible events.Tymek (talk) 15:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I don't have a bank account either. Why should I let bank take my money and charge me for making profit from it ? This was the most bizarre accusation that I ever heard, avoiding being exploited should be praised not criticised.--Molobo (talk) 01:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Election 2007

For the record, to user Malick78 In 2005 PiS got 3,185,714 votes, in 2007 - 5,183,477. Ask a kid from first grade, which number is higher, if you have problems with basic mathematics. Tymek (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)