This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Hey! IABot is not running properly on my end anymore for whatever reason, could someone else attempt to run on this page on their end to save myself manually adding archive links to all the citations. Thankyou! SP00KY talk 19:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I didn't want to expand the section to much and so I thought I would add notable things here that have been reported by 'legitimate sources' which may be used. I figure it will save the kind of 'list buildup', for a lack of a real term, that ongoing situations tend to turn into. It is subject to be added to:
(This was just an idea I had of a way of doing things, please do not be mad if it is incorrect way. ~ SP00KY talk 21:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC) )
(I just want to point out that the main purpose of this list is to be able to easily see and build a narrative when all this is over, however it ends. do not assume all of the links are good citations (most of it, at least what i have added, is 'internet journalism' MSM 'clickbait' trash in their reporting, which is more often than not glorified state propagandizing) and if adding on to the article it is probably best to independently look for the best ones. ) ~ Sp00ky.
The article is completeley POV in favour of the anarchist. it was proposed for deletion as already happened in the Italian Wikipedia, to avoid advertising Alfredo Cospito as a "good guy" like some users are doing here. The article should be rewritten completely, keeping in mind: - is presented as an anarchist in the first phrase, while is commonly considered a criminal and a terrorist; - the 2006 bombing of a Carabinieri's school military base is mentioned underlining the fact that "no one was hurt", while in the sentence is written clearly that the 2 bombs were made to kill and only for luck did not kill anyone. - is presented by as a "poor guy" under the 41 bis regime and that prison regime is used only to stop mafia, while this is not real. It's used to stop member of organizations that are in prison to give orders to others member of organizations outside prison. Excatly the reason that Alfredo Cospito is under this regime. - there are links to the ""works"" that Alfredo Cospito wrote. This is purely advertising, no need for the article and a neutral POV. - the kneecapping of the CEO of Ansaldo Nucleare and 2006 bombing, main reason of why this guy is in prison, is worth just some paragraphs, while the "conditions" of mr. Cospito in prison and his "hunger strike" take part of a majority of the article. - there is no clear mention that the guy was sentenced for really important criminal charges, such as terrorism, subversion of the democratic order and attempted massacre. Still is appointed as "anarchist" while the Italian judiciary system, made of three degrees of judgement, definitively established that it was a criminal and a terrorist.
This article need to be rewritten completely, or even deleted, because I annot understand how this guy is encyclopedic. Maybe the events that lead to his arrest are, not his "life".-- 185.219.180.93 ( talk) 10:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
I have rewritten the voice, hopefully some can help me and/or share opinions. Criteria:
Ffaffff ( talk) 15:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC) I have removed the template per WP:WTRMT. Feedback and edits welcome! Ffaffff ( talk) 15:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
In a constructive fashion, I will open this new section to try to iron out some differences we have about the article.
Let's start with "selected works". I would say this is a case of WP:NOTEVERYTHING, in particular WP:NOTADVERT (not that I am accusing anyone, mind you) and WP:NOTSOAP. Can we say Cospito is notable for his own writings? I would say no. Can we say the writings have had any kind of highlights on newspapers, TV? I would say no (compare with Bobby Sands or Ted Kaczynski).
Another point I would like to make is about current events (hunger strike). In my opinion and WP:CRYSTAL applies: this event is very likely to become notable (by WP standards) but we do not know yet and should wait for some time ( WP:NTEMP) before assessing this.
Same for adding each small development (petitions, intellectuals, etc.): WP:NEWSPAPER applies and such material should be moved to wikinews.
I am sure with goodwill and frank discussion we can reach consensus on these topics.
Ffaffff ( talk) 21:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
WP:RECENT does apply yes, that's why news articles were being collected at Talk:Alfredo_Cospito#Hunger_strike_and_other_things above and it would have been collegiate to put what you deleted there. Also, it is clear if you open a private browser window and search for Cospito that the hunger strike is relevant now and will be in 20 years time as well, even bodies such as Amnesty are commenting on it (that's actually what I came to the article to add). So it is absurd to delete it from the lead and delete the section. I see as a later edit you re-added the section, that's a step in the right direction.To add on that, WP:NOTNEWS begins "Editors are encouraged to include current and up-to-date information within its coverage" and some of these events will clearly be notable in 20 years time, for example the Greek carbombing
"Literary production and the like are non notable and should not feature in the article." that's a misreading of WP:N, otherwise you could go around deleting almost all works by almost all authors from their wikipedia pages. Cospito's works are clearly not notable enough for their own page, so they fit here instead.To add on that what I said below, these works are the reason for the imposition of 41-bis so they are very relevant in fact.
"what the group is called is unencyclopedic, "the sister of Elly Schlein" is a) bad english (should be "Elly Schlein" sister) and moreover, unencyclopedic. She could be the sister of the Donald Duck, it is *not* relevant to this article"- "the sister of Elly Schlein" is perfectly good english and Elly Schlein is not well known in English-speaking circles so it contextualises why her sister was targeted. I'm not sure why naming a group would be unecyclopedic either. Errors like these make it hard to track yoru edits, whcih is why I am patiently suggesting to discuss first.
I have added the relevant citation (keep in mind that MOS:LEAD does not forbid citations in the lead)- thanks for adding the citation, yes I know citations are not forbidden in the lead and actually I would have suggested that solution had you discussed it to establish consensus.
The reason for this regime change was motivated by the exchange of letters with other anarchists that Cospito has kept for 10 years and by writings sent by him for publication in area magazinesin Editoriale Domani Mujinga ( talk) 11:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Alfredo_Cospito&diff=1136853308&oldid=1136729344 this edits are just censorship! Is this article or wikipedia owned by this user Mujinga? Why he constantly delete everything that he does not like or that do not underline how good is now this terrorist? All the data that was deleted was accompanied with major sources! They are facts! We are putting a lot of stuff about the "hunger strike" and we do not put the facts about the attacks made by him? This is just straight censorship 185.219.180.91 ( talk) 14:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
This section of the article has become exactly a 'list article' of '[Date], thing happened. [Date], thing happened.', that I was seeking to avoid in the first place of careful editing of this fast moving section of the article and the reason I created the list above. Regardless and trying studiously to ignore of all this nonsense above I really do think this section of the article was in a higher quality a week ago and we would be better to return there. SP00KY talk 21:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
The lead should summarise the article, per MOS:LEAD. Ffaffff you are trying to shoehorn the word terrorist in with different edits, why is that? Do you have a conflict of interest you need to declare? I am looking at the sources and I really don't see it. This time around, you have re-added the claim with three citations: the West Point citation actually calls him an "anti-organization anarchist" and it's telling you had to search for two new citations, since already on the article we have a lot of sources calling him an anarchist, such as:
We also have (for example, the list goes on) these sources in English which we could add which call him simply an anarchist:
Even Breitbart, the most rightwing news source I could think of offhand and blacklisted here calls Cospito "An Italian anarchist" and "Far-left anarchist extremist" Mujinga ( talk) 11:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
To everyone involved in editing this article (in particolar Ffaffff, Mujinga, SP00KYtalk aka W1tchkr4ft 00 - cause it seems that you guys are the most active contributors to this article).
May I suggest to disengage for a bit and leave the writing of this article to someone else? Before it become an edit war and personal attacks became bigger and louder... I can understand that you really "feel" this article but is this really worth? Everyone is entitled to have a different opinion, but wikipedia is not the place to convince others or to show it so strongly. As stated in the Wikipedia help page, "there are currently 6,613,409 articles on Wikipedia. Consider focusing your contributions on another article, where you can more easily make constructive edits.". Take this message as a "peace offering", and I include myself in the "list", even if my edits are nothing compared to yours. Shall we take a break and maybe come back in 1-2 months with our mind settled? Allions ( talk) 17:37, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
After being reverted for summarising the article in the lead, per MOS:LEAD, I have made another attempt. Ffaffff you are using edit summaries to communicate, please use the talkpage instead. This will be the last time I reply to an edit summary, you said "Revert per MOS:LEADREL. "emphasis given to material should reflect its relative importance to the subject" 7 lines (on my browser) on hunger strike vs. 4 on trials is too much" in this edit, where you reduced the coverage of the hunger strike to 0.5 lines!? So Cospito is over 100 days without food, he is making media headlines worldwide and the Council of Ministers is calling an emergency meeting, and none of that is worth mentioning in the lead? Why do you think people are coming to read this article? Mujinga ( talk) 23:54, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
I believe this is material for wikinews, you don't. Maybe many people visit Berlusconi's article because of bunga bunga, but it is not mentioned in the lead- this is the problem in a nutshell. Belief is irrelevant here, we need to follow the sources and if the coverage of bunga bunga is extensive enough, then yes it should be in Berlusconi's article lead, no matter what individual editors think. The eyes of more competent editors on this article would of course be welcome. Mujinga ( talk) 13:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to ask for a WP:3O on the lead of this article, precisely on the Short descritption.
What to put as the introductory sentence:
Reasoning for both options can be found above ( Lead and Lead2 sections), but to summarise them:
Ffaffff ( talk) 19:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Alfredo Cospito (born 1967) is an Italian anarchist who is in prison for a gun attack on the CEO of Italian nuclear power company Ansaldo Nucleare in 2012, and the bomb attacks against a Carabinieri police school in Fossano in 2006.
From il Corriere: "And indeed medical sources tend to downplay what happened, speaking only of a moment of fatigue immediately overcome with the potassium supplement. After all, it has been months now that Cospito's health condition has alarmed doctors without, however, ever reaching a level of real life-threatening.".
It might or might have not happened, but his lawyer is not an "reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." I am reverting it. Ffaffff ( talk) 13:56, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
"In his twenties, Cospito refused to continue military service after being conscripted."
Is this lead section material? WP:LEAD: "The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies."
Is dodging draft what Cospito is notable for? Does it identify the topic? Is it an important point (say, more important than running a tattoo shop)? Ffaffff ( talk) 11:30, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Ok let's call a spade a spade. Ffaffff is a problematic editor and is wasting other editors' time now, as we can see from all the debatea above.
This is really annoying, I have already warned them previously about this in February and been brushed off. We can't have close paraphrasing on wikipedia. Yet when I change it I get reverted back. It's quite clear," a minor one to lure cadets out" is too close to "to lure the soldiers out." and yet I was reverted.
I had to report Ffaffff for editwarring after they changed the lead I was working on five times in 24 hours. Luckily for them this wasn't seen as a violation of 3RR, but then the very next day my changes to the lead were reverted by Ffafff after just 16 minutes!?
Reverting my edits because of "english" does not work when Ffaffff is a nonnative english speaker and repeatedly introduces errors due to a bad understanding of English grammar.
Changing the lead from "Cospito's lawyers reported" to "Cospito's lawyers alleged" is just POV pushing, despite the previous section Talk:Alfredo_Cospito#Cardiac_arrest
Editwarring over the phrase " the bomb could potentially have harmed people" is also strange, this is redundant because we already have the clause "In the opinion of the court, it was only by luck that nobody had died" just before it. And the massacre against the state charge does not rely on it, so it's again redundant.
All of Ffaffff's recent edits are to this article. Makes it look like a SPA, especially when they only have under 500 edits total. Ffaffff I suggest you edit elsewhere, there are plenty of other pages if you want to improve the encyclopedia. Mujinga ( talk) 10:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
I have finished making my edits, let me know what you think. Let us focus on the subject matter and not on the editors.
The current version is the consensus version I would say.
And again....
And again ...
Ffafff i see a strong pattern of you coming to this article one hour after someone else has edited it, then making a poor edit which is then reverted. Can I suggest you take this page off your watchlist and maybe edit elsewhere, maybe try to either review a good article nomination or bring an article to good article status? That's a decent way to learn how to follow wikipedia guidelines. Mujinga ( talk) 13:51, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
@ W1tchkr4ft 00, you just reverted my edits, all of them, with an edit summary stating just "leave."
It was nine edits, can I ask you to state what you did not like about them, specifically? You were already asked not to bash other contributors, but to describe the edit in edit summaries.
Example: what is wrong about this edit which removes a typo? Why did you revert it? Ffaffff ( talk) 05:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Hey. I wanted to add a sub-section on Solidarity actions towards the hunger strike as they have been highly spectacularized and reported on by the media machine. We already have a lot in it so it would mostly just be formating, maybe adding a little extra. Just wanted to get the go ahead and opinions here first, i usually avoid contentious articles and do not want to waste my time on something that could just be reverted. Cheers. SP00KY talk 18:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi W1tchkr4ft 00 yeah that sounds great at the moment we have a bit about international solidarity and very little about the protests in Italy, only really "More than 200 criminal lawyers and jurists signed a petition condemning the judicial treatment of Cospito.[9][29] In protest, anarchist groups held demonstrations in Bologna, Turin and Rome" - we sort of stopped adding information about that back in Feb, now would be a good time indeed to review the sources. By the way, I reverted your mention of "interrupting" the hunger strike since it wasn't in the sources. Cheers, Mujinga ( talk) 08:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Hey! IABot is not running properly on my end anymore for whatever reason, could someone else attempt to run on this page on their end to save myself manually adding archive links to all the citations. Thankyou! SP00KY talk 19:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I didn't want to expand the section to much and so I thought I would add notable things here that have been reported by 'legitimate sources' which may be used. I figure it will save the kind of 'list buildup', for a lack of a real term, that ongoing situations tend to turn into. It is subject to be added to:
(This was just an idea I had of a way of doing things, please do not be mad if it is incorrect way. ~ SP00KY talk 21:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC) )
(I just want to point out that the main purpose of this list is to be able to easily see and build a narrative when all this is over, however it ends. do not assume all of the links are good citations (most of it, at least what i have added, is 'internet journalism' MSM 'clickbait' trash in their reporting, which is more often than not glorified state propagandizing) and if adding on to the article it is probably best to independently look for the best ones. ) ~ Sp00ky.
The article is completeley POV in favour of the anarchist. it was proposed for deletion as already happened in the Italian Wikipedia, to avoid advertising Alfredo Cospito as a "good guy" like some users are doing here. The article should be rewritten completely, keeping in mind: - is presented as an anarchist in the first phrase, while is commonly considered a criminal and a terrorist; - the 2006 bombing of a Carabinieri's school military base is mentioned underlining the fact that "no one was hurt", while in the sentence is written clearly that the 2 bombs were made to kill and only for luck did not kill anyone. - is presented by as a "poor guy" under the 41 bis regime and that prison regime is used only to stop mafia, while this is not real. It's used to stop member of organizations that are in prison to give orders to others member of organizations outside prison. Excatly the reason that Alfredo Cospito is under this regime. - there are links to the ""works"" that Alfredo Cospito wrote. This is purely advertising, no need for the article and a neutral POV. - the kneecapping of the CEO of Ansaldo Nucleare and 2006 bombing, main reason of why this guy is in prison, is worth just some paragraphs, while the "conditions" of mr. Cospito in prison and his "hunger strike" take part of a majority of the article. - there is no clear mention that the guy was sentenced for really important criminal charges, such as terrorism, subversion of the democratic order and attempted massacre. Still is appointed as "anarchist" while the Italian judiciary system, made of three degrees of judgement, definitively established that it was a criminal and a terrorist.
This article need to be rewritten completely, or even deleted, because I annot understand how this guy is encyclopedic. Maybe the events that lead to his arrest are, not his "life".-- 185.219.180.93 ( talk) 10:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
I have rewritten the voice, hopefully some can help me and/or share opinions. Criteria:
Ffaffff ( talk) 15:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC) I have removed the template per WP:WTRMT. Feedback and edits welcome! Ffaffff ( talk) 15:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
In a constructive fashion, I will open this new section to try to iron out some differences we have about the article.
Let's start with "selected works". I would say this is a case of WP:NOTEVERYTHING, in particular WP:NOTADVERT (not that I am accusing anyone, mind you) and WP:NOTSOAP. Can we say Cospito is notable for his own writings? I would say no. Can we say the writings have had any kind of highlights on newspapers, TV? I would say no (compare with Bobby Sands or Ted Kaczynski).
Another point I would like to make is about current events (hunger strike). In my opinion and WP:CRYSTAL applies: this event is very likely to become notable (by WP standards) but we do not know yet and should wait for some time ( WP:NTEMP) before assessing this.
Same for adding each small development (petitions, intellectuals, etc.): WP:NEWSPAPER applies and such material should be moved to wikinews.
I am sure with goodwill and frank discussion we can reach consensus on these topics.
Ffaffff ( talk) 21:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
WP:RECENT does apply yes, that's why news articles were being collected at Talk:Alfredo_Cospito#Hunger_strike_and_other_things above and it would have been collegiate to put what you deleted there. Also, it is clear if you open a private browser window and search for Cospito that the hunger strike is relevant now and will be in 20 years time as well, even bodies such as Amnesty are commenting on it (that's actually what I came to the article to add). So it is absurd to delete it from the lead and delete the section. I see as a later edit you re-added the section, that's a step in the right direction.To add on that, WP:NOTNEWS begins "Editors are encouraged to include current and up-to-date information within its coverage" and some of these events will clearly be notable in 20 years time, for example the Greek carbombing
"Literary production and the like are non notable and should not feature in the article." that's a misreading of WP:N, otherwise you could go around deleting almost all works by almost all authors from their wikipedia pages. Cospito's works are clearly not notable enough for their own page, so they fit here instead.To add on that what I said below, these works are the reason for the imposition of 41-bis so they are very relevant in fact.
"what the group is called is unencyclopedic, "the sister of Elly Schlein" is a) bad english (should be "Elly Schlein" sister) and moreover, unencyclopedic. She could be the sister of the Donald Duck, it is *not* relevant to this article"- "the sister of Elly Schlein" is perfectly good english and Elly Schlein is not well known in English-speaking circles so it contextualises why her sister was targeted. I'm not sure why naming a group would be unecyclopedic either. Errors like these make it hard to track yoru edits, whcih is why I am patiently suggesting to discuss first.
I have added the relevant citation (keep in mind that MOS:LEAD does not forbid citations in the lead)- thanks for adding the citation, yes I know citations are not forbidden in the lead and actually I would have suggested that solution had you discussed it to establish consensus.
The reason for this regime change was motivated by the exchange of letters with other anarchists that Cospito has kept for 10 years and by writings sent by him for publication in area magazinesin Editoriale Domani Mujinga ( talk) 11:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Alfredo_Cospito&diff=1136853308&oldid=1136729344 this edits are just censorship! Is this article or wikipedia owned by this user Mujinga? Why he constantly delete everything that he does not like or that do not underline how good is now this terrorist? All the data that was deleted was accompanied with major sources! They are facts! We are putting a lot of stuff about the "hunger strike" and we do not put the facts about the attacks made by him? This is just straight censorship 185.219.180.91 ( talk) 14:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
This section of the article has become exactly a 'list article' of '[Date], thing happened. [Date], thing happened.', that I was seeking to avoid in the first place of careful editing of this fast moving section of the article and the reason I created the list above. Regardless and trying studiously to ignore of all this nonsense above I really do think this section of the article was in a higher quality a week ago and we would be better to return there. SP00KY talk 21:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
The lead should summarise the article, per MOS:LEAD. Ffaffff you are trying to shoehorn the word terrorist in with different edits, why is that? Do you have a conflict of interest you need to declare? I am looking at the sources and I really don't see it. This time around, you have re-added the claim with three citations: the West Point citation actually calls him an "anti-organization anarchist" and it's telling you had to search for two new citations, since already on the article we have a lot of sources calling him an anarchist, such as:
We also have (for example, the list goes on) these sources in English which we could add which call him simply an anarchist:
Even Breitbart, the most rightwing news source I could think of offhand and blacklisted here calls Cospito "An Italian anarchist" and "Far-left anarchist extremist" Mujinga ( talk) 11:15, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
To everyone involved in editing this article (in particolar Ffaffff, Mujinga, SP00KYtalk aka W1tchkr4ft 00 - cause it seems that you guys are the most active contributors to this article).
May I suggest to disengage for a bit and leave the writing of this article to someone else? Before it become an edit war and personal attacks became bigger and louder... I can understand that you really "feel" this article but is this really worth? Everyone is entitled to have a different opinion, but wikipedia is not the place to convince others or to show it so strongly. As stated in the Wikipedia help page, "there are currently 6,613,409 articles on Wikipedia. Consider focusing your contributions on another article, where you can more easily make constructive edits.". Take this message as a "peace offering", and I include myself in the "list", even if my edits are nothing compared to yours. Shall we take a break and maybe come back in 1-2 months with our mind settled? Allions ( talk) 17:37, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
After being reverted for summarising the article in the lead, per MOS:LEAD, I have made another attempt. Ffaffff you are using edit summaries to communicate, please use the talkpage instead. This will be the last time I reply to an edit summary, you said "Revert per MOS:LEADREL. "emphasis given to material should reflect its relative importance to the subject" 7 lines (on my browser) on hunger strike vs. 4 on trials is too much" in this edit, where you reduced the coverage of the hunger strike to 0.5 lines!? So Cospito is over 100 days without food, he is making media headlines worldwide and the Council of Ministers is calling an emergency meeting, and none of that is worth mentioning in the lead? Why do you think people are coming to read this article? Mujinga ( talk) 23:54, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
I believe this is material for wikinews, you don't. Maybe many people visit Berlusconi's article because of bunga bunga, but it is not mentioned in the lead- this is the problem in a nutshell. Belief is irrelevant here, we need to follow the sources and if the coverage of bunga bunga is extensive enough, then yes it should be in Berlusconi's article lead, no matter what individual editors think. The eyes of more competent editors on this article would of course be welcome. Mujinga ( talk) 13:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to ask for a WP:3O on the lead of this article, precisely on the Short descritption.
What to put as the introductory sentence:
Reasoning for both options can be found above ( Lead and Lead2 sections), but to summarise them:
Ffaffff ( talk) 19:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Alfredo Cospito (born 1967) is an Italian anarchist who is in prison for a gun attack on the CEO of Italian nuclear power company Ansaldo Nucleare in 2012, and the bomb attacks against a Carabinieri police school in Fossano in 2006.
From il Corriere: "And indeed medical sources tend to downplay what happened, speaking only of a moment of fatigue immediately overcome with the potassium supplement. After all, it has been months now that Cospito's health condition has alarmed doctors without, however, ever reaching a level of real life-threatening.".
It might or might have not happened, but his lawyer is not an "reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." I am reverting it. Ffaffff ( talk) 13:56, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
"In his twenties, Cospito refused to continue military service after being conscripted."
Is this lead section material? WP:LEAD: "The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies."
Is dodging draft what Cospito is notable for? Does it identify the topic? Is it an important point (say, more important than running a tattoo shop)? Ffaffff ( talk) 11:30, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Ok let's call a spade a spade. Ffaffff is a problematic editor and is wasting other editors' time now, as we can see from all the debatea above.
This is really annoying, I have already warned them previously about this in February and been brushed off. We can't have close paraphrasing on wikipedia. Yet when I change it I get reverted back. It's quite clear," a minor one to lure cadets out" is too close to "to lure the soldiers out." and yet I was reverted.
I had to report Ffaffff for editwarring after they changed the lead I was working on five times in 24 hours. Luckily for them this wasn't seen as a violation of 3RR, but then the very next day my changes to the lead were reverted by Ffafff after just 16 minutes!?
Reverting my edits because of "english" does not work when Ffaffff is a nonnative english speaker and repeatedly introduces errors due to a bad understanding of English grammar.
Changing the lead from "Cospito's lawyers reported" to "Cospito's lawyers alleged" is just POV pushing, despite the previous section Talk:Alfredo_Cospito#Cardiac_arrest
Editwarring over the phrase " the bomb could potentially have harmed people" is also strange, this is redundant because we already have the clause "In the opinion of the court, it was only by luck that nobody had died" just before it. And the massacre against the state charge does not rely on it, so it's again redundant.
All of Ffaffff's recent edits are to this article. Makes it look like a SPA, especially when they only have under 500 edits total. Ffaffff I suggest you edit elsewhere, there are plenty of other pages if you want to improve the encyclopedia. Mujinga ( talk) 10:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
I have finished making my edits, let me know what you think. Let us focus on the subject matter and not on the editors.
The current version is the consensus version I would say.
And again....
And again ...
Ffafff i see a strong pattern of you coming to this article one hour after someone else has edited it, then making a poor edit which is then reverted. Can I suggest you take this page off your watchlist and maybe edit elsewhere, maybe try to either review a good article nomination or bring an article to good article status? That's a decent way to learn how to follow wikipedia guidelines. Mujinga ( talk) 13:51, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
@ W1tchkr4ft 00, you just reverted my edits, all of them, with an edit summary stating just "leave."
It was nine edits, can I ask you to state what you did not like about them, specifically? You were already asked not to bash other contributors, but to describe the edit in edit summaries.
Example: what is wrong about this edit which removes a typo? Why did you revert it? Ffaffff ( talk) 05:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Hey. I wanted to add a sub-section on Solidarity actions towards the hunger strike as they have been highly spectacularized and reported on by the media machine. We already have a lot in it so it would mostly just be formating, maybe adding a little extra. Just wanted to get the go ahead and opinions here first, i usually avoid contentious articles and do not want to waste my time on something that could just be reverted. Cheers. SP00KY talk 18:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi W1tchkr4ft 00 yeah that sounds great at the moment we have a bit about international solidarity and very little about the protests in Italy, only really "More than 200 criminal lawyers and jurists signed a petition condemning the judicial treatment of Cospito.[9][29] In protest, anarchist groups held demonstrations in Bologna, Turin and Rome" - we sort of stopped adding information about that back in Feb, now would be a good time indeed to review the sources. By the way, I reverted your mention of "interrupting" the hunger strike since it wasn't in the sources. Cheers, Mujinga ( talk) 08:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)