![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Albert Folens be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The contribution by 193.1.40.28 looks like it belongs more on the talk page than the main entry. Anyone have any opinion on whether I should cut and paste it to here? Autarch 12:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
It is obvious that the text about the Flemish Legion is not correct. It sais:
"Flemish Legion which was a nationalist Flemish party fighting for Flemish independence from France"
Most stupid is of course that they would be fighting for independence from France. Flanders was obviously not a part of France at the time, but, as it is today, part of Belgium.
Also, the Flemish Legion wasn't a party. It was a legion of volunteers that was recruited by the Vlaams Nationaal Verbond to go fighting with the German army against the Soviets. Before this VNV initiative this recruitment was only done by the Algemeene-SS Vlaanderen.
Since I am Flemish and English isn't my native tongue, I didn't correct this in the article... -- Bertnederbelg ( talk) 11:07, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
The sentence "Had they been published when Mr. Folens was alive, they would have been considered defamatory", referring to the Senan Moloney interview used in Hidden History is unclear. Does it refer to Folens own words? (Can one defame oneself?) Does it apply to inferences made from his words? The Dictionary of Irish Biography refers to it, while it may not prove that he was in the Gestapo (but he was in the Sicherheitsdienst) it doesn't reflect well on him - the summary of the interview describes antisemitic comments made by him.
In short, the sentence I quote above seems like a case of breach of WP:EDITORIAL or at the very least it should require a reference to back it up. Autarch ( talk) 00:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Albert Folens be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The contribution by 193.1.40.28 looks like it belongs more on the talk page than the main entry. Anyone have any opinion on whether I should cut and paste it to here? Autarch 12:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
It is obvious that the text about the Flemish Legion is not correct. It sais:
"Flemish Legion which was a nationalist Flemish party fighting for Flemish independence from France"
Most stupid is of course that they would be fighting for independence from France. Flanders was obviously not a part of France at the time, but, as it is today, part of Belgium.
Also, the Flemish Legion wasn't a party. It was a legion of volunteers that was recruited by the Vlaams Nationaal Verbond to go fighting with the German army against the Soviets. Before this VNV initiative this recruitment was only done by the Algemeene-SS Vlaanderen.
Since I am Flemish and English isn't my native tongue, I didn't correct this in the article... -- Bertnederbelg ( talk) 11:07, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
The sentence "Had they been published when Mr. Folens was alive, they would have been considered defamatory", referring to the Senan Moloney interview used in Hidden History is unclear. Does it refer to Folens own words? (Can one defame oneself?) Does it apply to inferences made from his words? The Dictionary of Irish Biography refers to it, while it may not prove that he was in the Gestapo (but he was in the Sicherheitsdienst) it doesn't reflect well on him - the summary of the interview describes antisemitic comments made by him.
In short, the sentence I quote above seems like a case of breach of WP:EDITORIAL or at the very least it should require a reference to back it up. Autarch ( talk) 00:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)