![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
I don't see much diffence between the recent version and the following fictitious version:
"Norwegian computer security analysts were in 2011 in the process of researching what appear to be hidden pedo-phile activity codes in Breivik's manifesto, including references to the GPS coordinates of several major sites throughout Europe".
Recent version: "Norwegian computer security analysts were in 2011 in the process of researching what appear to be hidden codes in Breivik's manifesto, including references to the GPS coordinates of several major sites throughout Europe.( "Experts try to decode Breivik's manifesto".)"
Both versions come across as a smear campaign~against Breivik. The paragraph from the "10:51, 28 March 2016"-version has been moved to discussion, until there is a rationale available for why he should be smeared on this point, nearly five years later. 89.8.239.64 ( talk) 11:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Why does it contain a category Crimes involving Satanism or the occult? Has Breivik every claimed to have been associated with any satanic ideology? The article does not say so. Tashi Talk to me 21:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that doesn't seem supported. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 03:22, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
As there have been quite a few changes to the lead sentence in the article recently, I thought I ought to start discussion here. As I write this, the sentence is:
"Anders Behring Breivik [...] is a Norwegian terrorist, convicted for the 2011 Norway attacks."
I have taken into account differing views on the wording from editors' edit summaries (primarily that Breivik is only know for one terrorism event) so I think that the current choice is appropriate and accurate. There was use of a dash in the sentence, which I've removed as I think it disrupted the flow of reading. matt ( talk) 11:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The article says that Breivik is visited by "military chaplain every two weeks and also by a prison visitor who is a military officer (ranked major) and a theologian". Is it possible that this is actually only one person: a prison visitor that is a military chaplain (a theologian with the military rank of major). I think the only reference is from NRK journalists who attended the trial. Why would one during the trial only focus on the military rank of only one of the alleged two? Perhaps the two journalists got that point somewhat wrong, during the four days of trial? 178.232.55.137 ( talk) 12:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
He has described his prison conditions as a "mini Abu Ghraib." 178.232.55.137 ( talk) 12:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
"Politicians from several Norwegian parties have protested Breivik's activities in prison, which they see as him continuing to espouse his ideology and possibly encouraging further criminal acts. [1] The prison authorities have queried the Ministry of Justice on whether these activities, which Breivik terms as network building, can be perceived in the context of the terrorist acts he has committed and have received an affirmative reply from the ministry. This would mean that letters from Breivik may be confiscated. [2] [3] The clause which authorises such measures contains the wording, "... if the package contains information on planning or execution of punishable offense, evasion of the execution or acts which will disturb peace, order, and security". [2]"
There is no mention of particular letters having been able to get through the censorship at the prison, so why should unspecific complaints from politicians be mentioned in the article? 178.232.55.137 ( talk) 13:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |trans_title=
ignored (|trans-title=
suggested) (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
VG-20120726
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Views and news
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page)."In the letter, he described the present conditions of his confinement as “torture.” [1]. Do we know enough of the context and the complete wording of the letters to the media outlets? He only gets to meet paid professionals that he has not invited, and none of the visitors that he invites get approved by the prison authorities (to come)—that's part of the context that is getting lost between "playstations" and "torture". 46.212.12.241 ( talk) 19:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
References
"On 15 March 2016 NRK claimed it "has knowledge of Breivik having conducted a ceremony, to mark his swearing allegiance to" Vidkun Quisling. [1]"
The article already is relaying Breivik's lawyers claim that Breivik converted to Nazism while in prison. Regarding the one-man ceremony in prison or any specific importance of Quisling-style Nazism—notability has not been demonstrated. 178.232.213.58 ( talk) 10:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |trans_title=
ignored (|trans-title=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)</ref>)I can not see that any of the smear in the second reference has been established in the 2016 court verdict. And it does contrast with what the court established in the verdict (see the first reference). Should point one be mentioned? Should reference two, and how it contrasts reference one, be mentioned in the wikipedia article? Should both be mentioned, or should none (for now)? 178.232.213.58 ( talk) 12:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
When someone provides references that around two of the victims of 22 July actually died one or two days later, then the following is slightly untrue:
"On 22 July 2011, he killed eight people by detonating a van bomb amid the government quarter Regjeringskvartalet in Oslo, then shot and killed 69". 46.212.221.114 ( talk) 23:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@ User2534: What about their commonalities is not achieved through the use of the Category:Norwegian mass murderers category? It seems to me that if their only commonality is nationality, the existing categorization is adequate. If they have commonalities other than nationality, these are presumably described in reliable sources; can you provide any? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 21:34, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I am not sure that today's version is correct about the 2016 appeal: I might have made a mistake. Now I am thinking that the appeal was made by the government way before 20 May. I am guessing that what happened on (or around) 20 May, was that the government completed the requirements for the appeal to fully recognized and accepted (by the judicial branch of the government). Please be on the lookout for a facsimilie of a future document (or from around 20 May) that says what is the " effective date" of the appeal. Am I the only one who is slightly uncomfortable that the article is not crystal clear on this (arguably important) point? 89.8.9.254 ( talk) 09:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
One media source [7] says that Peter Mangs threw letters from Breivik. The source does not spell out the following:
Letters being thrown might be interesting for online newspapers, but for an encyclopedia such information might need clarifying on one or more of the points above. With no significant additional information, then I think the article can disregard that letters were thrown, because notability has not been demonstrated. 46.212.245.53 ( talk) 20:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Anders Behring Breivik. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:59, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Anders Behring Breivik. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:55, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
I dont want to mess the article up so can someone more experienced in Wiki do this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c4:20d:1300:6126:aed1:a1cb:b1e ( talk) 20:20, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
"The manifesto states its author is "100 percent Christian",[38] but he is not "excessively religious"[38] and considers himself a "cultural Christian" and a "modern-day crusader".[38][237] His manifesto states "I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person, as that would be a lie", "
So he said that "he is not "excessively religious", and he said that he is not "very religious".
178.232.8.86 (
talk)
16:29, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The following two secondary sources identify Breivik as an Odinist:
In 2015 he stated that he considers himself "culturally Christian" but that he has never personally identified as a Christian, and called his religion Odinism.
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work=
(
help)There are sources from 2011 that promote speculation and conjecture about a manifesto, asserting that Breivik may be a possible Christian
There are two sources from 2015 that are a direct quote of the killer saying that he is not a Christian and that he is an Odinist.
Per WP:LABEL and WP:SYNTH, wikipedia should not synthesize speculation from 2011 about "cultural chrisitan" into the loaded label "Christian terrorist".
The conflicting evidence from 2015 should be presented later on in the lead section, rather than the first sencence pronouncing "Chrisitan terrorist" when later contradicted by claims of Odinism later in the lead section.
In the absence of clear, explicit declarations in reliable, secondary sources that expressly declare "Christian terrorist" then the phrase should not be used in the lead section due to contradictory evidence from 2015 that he is an Odinist.Note that the dagen.no source says that «kristen terrorist» is a dubious label (Nov 2015).
-- Callinus ( talk) 01:04, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Also note, I don't have good sourcing, but there are limited articles saying that what Varg Vikernes is linked to is Neo-völkisch movements - the political pan-Germanic neo-paganism used as a form of ethnic nationalist - Neo-völkisch movements#Nordic racial paganism. Some blogs link Breivik's Odinist beliefs to earlier nordic racial paganism.
-- Callinus ( talk) 02:59, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Shouldn't the article (not the title, but throughout the article) say his new last name? Cbswagman ( talk) 00:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Breivik has changed the his name to Fjotolf Hansen. The article should probably be moved to the new name. -- Ugly Ketchup ( talk) 18:05, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
In the opening paragraph it mentions that in the second evaluation Breivik was only diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder. Considering that antisocial personality disorder is more associated with violence, wouldn't it be just as worthy of note, if not, more?
Currently : a second evaluation concluded that he was not psychotic during the attacks but did have narcissistic personality disorder. [1] [2]
Proposed : a second evaluation concluded that he was not psychotic during the attacks but did have narcissistic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder. [1] [2]
Parafron-trodaí ( talk) 11:39, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Parafron-trodaí
References
[8]. Yes, these people were mentioned in his "manifesto". But they were not really relevant to the crime judging from the cited sources. This is a WP:BLP problem with regard to people who were mentioned by Breivik. My very best wishes ( talk) 19:09, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Rv, not being as bad as the Islamic state doesn't mean someone convicted of terrorism and described by RS as a terrorist isn't a terrorist. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 01:55, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Don't we have any actual pictures of breivik rather than some computerized sketch ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:CA:8200:34A:3DC0:8421:5200:8BE0 ( talk) 22:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes, we have. But people refuses to change it because people that wrote this page is fan og Behring Breivik and doesn't want to let us see how he looks today; fat and bald. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.52.206.106 ( talk) 20:50, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Odds are that any modern photographs are copyrighted, so in any case, the portraits he had in his manifesto could be used, right? It should fall under fair use. Not sure, though. 180app ( talk) 14:12, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't the "sketch" fall under original research? -- Veggies ( talk) 20:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
I am just curious to understand why the article is not renamed Fjotolf Hansen, which this man legally changed his name to in 2017. As far as I am aware, Bradley Manning changed her name to Chelsea Manning, and the Wikipedia page changed too
/info/en/?search=Chelsea_Manning
So what is the official Wikipedia protocol, does a name change need to include a sex change, or is it not recognised if a prisoner does it? Thank you TerminatorXtotheEdgeofPanic ( talk) 11:49, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't really find this article to be right. Everyone is described as the victim of Anders. But what has to be remembered is the Anders was the victims of a heavily emotionally and psycologicaly (probably also sexually) abusive mother. And had the Child Welfare Services not been that ineffective he would have been placed into foster care between age 2-4 and had had a chance at a normal life. If Norway learned anything from all of this, then it is that Barnevernet is now internationally known for taking children away that are at risk of being abused rather then abandoning them and leaving them in the care of their abusive parents. Which is a very good thing. And this should be known internationally as well. Anders developed into being a serial killer because of his terrible mother. His mother in turn had also been abandoned by her community, family and Child Welfare Services and had a horrible childhood as well. It is important to take care of the children of your nation in order to avoid disasters like his. I also really despise how his mother is portrayed in this article as a victim of him. She was clearly a perpetrator. -- Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 12:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
If you really want a solution: "One Kuda Without Company", as monotheism teaches. I do believe this requires some thinking on absolute rules. Breivik seems also to symbolize having the aids illness. His name change seems to imply "I am sorry". And also questions if he rather should be lobotomized. Old Zyr customs would indicate a lobotomy longer back, while the islamic "Kuda" signifies everything we want in politics these days. Incl. this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:FE0:C700:2:781F:1A82:338:D2B7 ( talk) 15:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
After someone forks out the "Civil trial against Norway's government" section, one can start streamlining the current article by changing the beginning of that section:
"During 15—18 March 2016, Breivik sued Norway's government was the plaintiff in a
civil trial. The
Ministry of Justice and Public Security was the defendant in court, since the Correctional Service (which was being sued) was su bordinate to the ministry. The verdict was appealed; the appellate court rendered its verdict, and the supreme court decided not to hear the case."
(Text should be forked into a title such as Anders Behring Breivik's civil trial against Norway's government.) 89.8.121.26 ( talk) 12:38, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
I've tagged a huge section on Breivik's mother and likely child abuse because it all originated from one source. The material is covered far more succinctly where it should be, in his early life section. Should this additional section be removed? Unknown Temptation ( talk) 22:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
"A contrary view, on website Decryptedmatrix.com (in 2012), claimed that Belarusian opposition figure Mikhail Reshetnikov is claiming that Breivik underwent paramilitary training in a camp organised by retired KGB colonel Valery Lunev. According to Reshetnikov, Breivik visited Belarus three times and had lasting connections with the country."
This stuff likely aint adequate for "the wikipedia project started by Jimbo Wales". Someone - please put the article out of its misery! 89.8.181.23 ( talk) 21:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Emir of Wikipedia ( talk) 20:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
So a "young couple", that was young in the 1980s, talked to police after the 2011 murders.
The source does not say, that the following was any indication of sexual abuse (rather than a mother's odd attempt at commenting about the boy not having male role-models or whatever, in the home).
'Breivik was then placed [by authority of the Child Welfare Service,] with a young couple. This couple later told police that the mother, when bringing two-year-old Breivik to the house, had asked that he be allowed to touch the man's penis because he had no one to compare himself to in terms of appearance; "He only saw [or was used to seeing girls' pee holes—] jentetisser", the mother told the couple, according to the couple's statement [in 2011 or 2012] to police'.
Source: https://www.tv2.no/a/8142855/. Retrieved 9 April 2021.
Does the paragraph have any importance for the rest of the wiki-article?
Are there valid arguments for us saying, "Nevertheless, one sees value of keeping this information in the article - however isolated the information might seem"? 89.8.103.8 ( talk) 08:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
(One is not arguing the importance of keeping, "Breivik was then placed [by authority of the Child Welfare Service,] with a young couple."). 89.8.103.8 ( talk) 08:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
"While still a juvenile, he was arrested [for spraying paint on a wall], and was consequently rejected from not conscripted into the Norwegian Armed Forces. At the age of 20 he joined [a politcial party], the anti-immigration/right-wing
Progress Party, and chaired the local Vest Oslo branch of the party's youth organization during 2002. He left the Progress Party in 2006 and went on to join a gun club, while also founding a company which he used to finance his planned terrorist attacks."
Looks like, walks like, and quacks like cherrypicking. 89.8.79.123 ( talk) 15:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Suggested justification for anyone that removes "Height" from infobox: "His height is not mentioned in the article itself", or "There are no sources present, that indicate that his height contributed to the body count of his crimes", or "Notability (of height) not shown". 89.8.78.46 ( talk) 08:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
The following type of edit remark, arguably leaves room for improvement: "remove hidden comment adding vandalism". @ Werkenone: 89.8.100.33 ( talk) 20:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Is he also a wiki-notable rhetorician? ( Expo (magazine) might not be a good enough source to indicate wiki-notability in regard to rhetoric.)
He is a Nazi and that's mentioned in the lede. Why should puffery remain in the lede, regarding "support ethno-nationalists"? (Having in the lede, a shortlist of Nazi groups that he supports - that might be a similar sort of puffery that the lede does not need.)
Suggested move to discussion:
"and uses counterjihadist rhetoric to support ethno-nationalists". 89.8.94.166 ( talk) 04:58, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
While in prison, Breivik's religion allegedly has changed from whatever - to
Odinism.
It arguably is reasonable to move "Odinism" out of the lede, and into some other section.
89.8.94.62 (
talk)
12:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
In August 2021 the lede of the article was changed from van bomb to "car bomb". Please anyone, put "van bomb" back into the lead (and then feel free to take further issue to the talk page, regarding if the article should call the 3.5 ton cargo van (that has a cabin that arguably is isolated from the cargo room), a car). @ Werkenone: 89.8.179.219 ( talk) 07:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Just as "von" in German, "van" means honorifics in Dutch like van Dessel [van Bomb], so let's say it differently. IP special:Contributions/89.8.0.0/16 once and for all, please stop placing <-- XXX --> comments in any and all articles, PLEASE remove desired content directly. WP:BEBOLD. Werkenone ( talk) 07:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Source [11] from 2022 that explains that Norwegian law mandates that prisoners in preventive detention, who have been refused parole must be indicted again. 84.48.174.53 ( talk) 12:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Has he on January 18 denied responsibility or not? Does media's experts think that his answer on that point, is ambiguous?
Original quote, according
[12] to
NRK: "– Jeg som menneske utførte handlingene i den grad at jeg lot meg radikalisere, og det er til en viss grad min skyld".
I am not convinced that his whole testimony contains one major (and clear) idea about him having much guilt for the massacre/terrorism in 2011. Some other RS will chime in.
89.8.89.15 (
talk)
15:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Excessively wordy and not very easy to read.
Solipsism 101 (
talk)
18:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Moved to discussion:
sksoker
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Andresen
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).nrk1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).He has not registered any political party (yet) (as of his trial testimony in 2022). Furthermore he says that his occupation is: candidate for parliamentary elections, in regard to an (unnamed) Nazi party.
If one wants to say more than that - then there have to be sources to back that up; for now the wiki-article does not have inline sourcing for saying more than that.
89.8.118.74 (
talk)
16:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Please anyone, be bold and move to discussion, the following
Authorities in relevant news today: Kriminalomsorgsdirektoratet ( KDI). Source: NRK at 11.59 today.--Stuff that deals with Breivik, is (arguably) normally presented to media by underlying agencies.--However, I don't think we need the name of the agency etc. in regard to the events from today, that the article mentions. 89.8.88.119 ( talk) 16:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC) 89.8.88.119 ( talk) 16:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Since the hearing started, I see that one or multiple users (it's unclear because anon) have been updating the article frequently regarding the events. Please don't do that - Wikipedia is not a newspaper. It's also not a transcript. While some of the content is encyclopaedic, most of it isn't. -- Xurizuri ( talk) 13:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
The prison that he is scheduled to be moved to - on a day that the public will not have advance information about - is not a "stone's throw away from Utøya".--There is a plan that Breivik will be moved from Skien Prison; for now I don't think we need that information about distances - and possibly not ever. 89.8.88.119 ( talk) 15:34, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Someone has added the category Norwegian Zionist. I'm not going to revert as I'm new to Wikipedia but I really don't think that this is correct? Would someone with more knowledge of WP policy please take a look? Knitsey ( talk) 17:58, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply jpg. Knitsey ( talk) 16:43, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Waffling text?
Page sizes:
— Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Moved out of article - waiting for spin-off article about 2016 trial (where the moved info might belong):
"Breivik talked about the parties NFP and NL; he said that those later changed name to ["
Nordic State" or] Nordiske stat. "<ref name="sksoker" /> --Justification: "Re: In Breivik's imagination there exist a political party. The non-important info, hereby moved to talk page, waiting to become part of spin-off article. Rmv
2001:2020:8317:D49F:A8B4:361D:AB95:D2EB (
talk) 01:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)/
2001:2020:8317:D49F:A8B4:361D:AB95:D2EB (
talk) 01:13, 21 March 2023 (UTC)/
2001:2020:8317:D49F:A8B4:361D:AB95:D2EB (
talk)
01:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
sksoker
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).auto3
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).expressen1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).should be 4 paragraphs per the mos toobigtokale ( talk) 03:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
where it says 'Anders Breivik is a Norwegian far-right wing terrorist' @ tha beginning of tha article, may we please add is a 'far-right wing terrorist & a neo-Nazi', cuz he has said that he was a neo-Nazi? Monkeylady999 ( talk) 21:09, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
He is not suing the Correctional Service.--Not sure that this wiki-article has yet explained how the Correctional Service formally gets involved.--I will inform this talk page, if sources pop up that are illuminate that part of the process. 46.15.118.28 ( talk) 19:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Two quotes from the article:
"His declared assets in 2007 were about NKr 630,000 (US$76,244)"
".. in 2009 and his assets amounted to 390,000 kroner ($72,063)"
I'm trying to make sense of this, any help? 77.169.177.105 ( talk) 22:58, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Andersnordic has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 11 § Andersnordic until a consensus is reached.
Ivanvector (
Talk/
Edits)
18:04, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
"On the day of the attacks, Breivik emailed a compendium of texts entitled 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, describing his militant ideology." -> Seems important to know who he emailed, and looks weird this way. Douweziel ( talk) 03:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
According to Dagbladet, journalist Martine Aurdal, Breivik cried in court 12 years (before 2024). The source says that then when Breivik cried, "he became touched by his own propaganda-movie, that was shown during the terror-trial after "July 22".--My point is that the one of the 2024 trial's main narrative seems to have become that 'none of the government witnesses has ever seen Breivik cry'.--Without trying to sound insensitive, the 2024 trial section, should maybe not focus on '69 tears in heaven, but none from Breivik' etc.--If this post is regarded as helpful, then fine.--I am not sure yet, that the sources are only saying that 'no one really thinks that Breivik has showed any remorse in 2024, even though some commentators think that they saw a few tears'. But the wind might sort of be blowing in that direction.--Source (about tears, 12 years ago): www.dagbladet.no/meninger/ingen-grater-med-breivik/80793496, Retrieved today. 46.15.98.20 ( talk) 22:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
WAY too much detail about the 2024 trial. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 16:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I am assuming that the English translation of the word, might stay in the article. (The word was said by one of the prison official on Day 3 of the trial in 2024.)--'Some sort of leader-figure' is not really what is being said--For now, the closest translation might be "someone in the category of leadership".--The word, i think, could be used to describe someone who one is not sure if is a leader (of an organisation), but on the surface it seems that perhaps the person is a leader (of an organisation).--Anyway, translating to "leader figure", would be going to far, i feel; i am guessing that the witness knows other precise words for various kinds of 'leader-type people'.--Note: some words have been in use for decades, but might not be in any major dictionaries.--The word has been around for decades, and i would say that it has not changed its meaning (for that time).--Conclusion: "leader figure", was not what the witness said.--If this post was helpful, then fine.
46.15.99.40 (
talk)
05:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Leader-like figure, is what I have landed at, for now.
46.15.96.109 (
talk)
15:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
On (the middle of) Day 4, the judge had some questions for Breivik about the woman with the petting-dog or RedCross-dog.--The question was not if the government had brought in a woman (with a dog), to make the man's juices flow, or make the man hot-to-trot.--The newspaper's view is that Breivik tried to chat her up (and she revealed that she is not single, and has kids).--For now, I am not seeing that the commentators are making much of the RedCross-dog etc and the judge's question.--Seems that no priceless testimony to see, right here, for now.--Source, Nettavisen, nettavisen.no/nyheter/breivik-saksoker-staten/s/5-95-1557595. 46.15.96.109 ( talk) 16:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
"Breivik announced that he did not recognize the legitimacy of the court and therefore did not accept its decision—he decided not to appeal, saying this would legitimize the authority of the Oslo District Court".--Can all this stuff be moved out of the lede? (I, for one, am fine with move.) 46.15.96.152 ( talk) 22:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
"The verdict [was] appealed [and a final verdict exists], and Breivik and his lawyer [launched] a lawsuit (in a non-Norwegian court) regarding the conditions of his imprisonment and alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights, [and the last-mentioned lawsuit, was not heard in court]."
Can something be done to this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.93.252.223 ( talk) 12:51, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
I don't see much diffence between the recent version and the following fictitious version:
"Norwegian computer security analysts were in 2011 in the process of researching what appear to be hidden pedo-phile activity codes in Breivik's manifesto, including references to the GPS coordinates of several major sites throughout Europe".
Recent version: "Norwegian computer security analysts were in 2011 in the process of researching what appear to be hidden codes in Breivik's manifesto, including references to the GPS coordinates of several major sites throughout Europe.( "Experts try to decode Breivik's manifesto".)"
Both versions come across as a smear campaign~against Breivik. The paragraph from the "10:51, 28 March 2016"-version has been moved to discussion, until there is a rationale available for why he should be smeared on this point, nearly five years later. 89.8.239.64 ( talk) 11:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Why does it contain a category Crimes involving Satanism or the occult? Has Breivik every claimed to have been associated with any satanic ideology? The article does not say so. Tashi Talk to me 21:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that doesn't seem supported. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 03:22, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
As there have been quite a few changes to the lead sentence in the article recently, I thought I ought to start discussion here. As I write this, the sentence is:
"Anders Behring Breivik [...] is a Norwegian terrorist, convicted for the 2011 Norway attacks."
I have taken into account differing views on the wording from editors' edit summaries (primarily that Breivik is only know for one terrorism event) so I think that the current choice is appropriate and accurate. There was use of a dash in the sentence, which I've removed as I think it disrupted the flow of reading. matt ( talk) 11:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The article says that Breivik is visited by "military chaplain every two weeks and also by a prison visitor who is a military officer (ranked major) and a theologian". Is it possible that this is actually only one person: a prison visitor that is a military chaplain (a theologian with the military rank of major). I think the only reference is from NRK journalists who attended the trial. Why would one during the trial only focus on the military rank of only one of the alleged two? Perhaps the two journalists got that point somewhat wrong, during the four days of trial? 178.232.55.137 ( talk) 12:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
He has described his prison conditions as a "mini Abu Ghraib." 178.232.55.137 ( talk) 12:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
"Politicians from several Norwegian parties have protested Breivik's activities in prison, which they see as him continuing to espouse his ideology and possibly encouraging further criminal acts. [1] The prison authorities have queried the Ministry of Justice on whether these activities, which Breivik terms as network building, can be perceived in the context of the terrorist acts he has committed and have received an affirmative reply from the ministry. This would mean that letters from Breivik may be confiscated. [2] [3] The clause which authorises such measures contains the wording, "... if the package contains information on planning or execution of punishable offense, evasion of the execution or acts which will disturb peace, order, and security". [2]"
There is no mention of particular letters having been able to get through the censorship at the prison, so why should unspecific complaints from politicians be mentioned in the article? 178.232.55.137 ( talk) 13:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
References
{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |trans_title=
ignored (|trans-title=
suggested) (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
VG-20120726
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Views and news
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page)."In the letter, he described the present conditions of his confinement as “torture.” [1]. Do we know enough of the context and the complete wording of the letters to the media outlets? He only gets to meet paid professionals that he has not invited, and none of the visitors that he invites get approved by the prison authorities (to come)—that's part of the context that is getting lost between "playstations" and "torture". 46.212.12.241 ( talk) 19:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
References
"On 15 March 2016 NRK claimed it "has knowledge of Breivik having conducted a ceremony, to mark his swearing allegiance to" Vidkun Quisling. [1]"
The article already is relaying Breivik's lawyers claim that Breivik converted to Nazism while in prison. Regarding the one-man ceremony in prison or any specific importance of Quisling-style Nazism—notability has not been demonstrated. 178.232.213.58 ( talk) 10:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |trans_title=
ignored (|trans-title=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |accessdate=
(
help)</ref>)I can not see that any of the smear in the second reference has been established in the 2016 court verdict. And it does contrast with what the court established in the verdict (see the first reference). Should point one be mentioned? Should reference two, and how it contrasts reference one, be mentioned in the wikipedia article? Should both be mentioned, or should none (for now)? 178.232.213.58 ( talk) 12:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
When someone provides references that around two of the victims of 22 July actually died one or two days later, then the following is slightly untrue:
"On 22 July 2011, he killed eight people by detonating a van bomb amid the government quarter Regjeringskvartalet in Oslo, then shot and killed 69". 46.212.221.114 ( talk) 23:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
@ User2534: What about their commonalities is not achieved through the use of the Category:Norwegian mass murderers category? It seems to me that if their only commonality is nationality, the existing categorization is adequate. If they have commonalities other than nationality, these are presumably described in reliable sources; can you provide any? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 21:34, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
I am not sure that today's version is correct about the 2016 appeal: I might have made a mistake. Now I am thinking that the appeal was made by the government way before 20 May. I am guessing that what happened on (or around) 20 May, was that the government completed the requirements for the appeal to fully recognized and accepted (by the judicial branch of the government). Please be on the lookout for a facsimilie of a future document (or from around 20 May) that says what is the " effective date" of the appeal. Am I the only one who is slightly uncomfortable that the article is not crystal clear on this (arguably important) point? 89.8.9.254 ( talk) 09:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
One media source [7] says that Peter Mangs threw letters from Breivik. The source does not spell out the following:
Letters being thrown might be interesting for online newspapers, but for an encyclopedia such information might need clarifying on one or more of the points above. With no significant additional information, then I think the article can disregard that letters were thrown, because notability has not been demonstrated. 46.212.245.53 ( talk) 20:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Anders Behring Breivik. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:59, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Anders Behring Breivik. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:55, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
I dont want to mess the article up so can someone more experienced in Wiki do this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c4:20d:1300:6126:aed1:a1cb:b1e ( talk) 20:20, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
"The manifesto states its author is "100 percent Christian",[38] but he is not "excessively religious"[38] and considers himself a "cultural Christian" and a "modern-day crusader".[38][237] His manifesto states "I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person, as that would be a lie", "
So he said that "he is not "excessively religious", and he said that he is not "very religious".
178.232.8.86 (
talk)
16:29, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The following two secondary sources identify Breivik as an Odinist:
In 2015 he stated that he considers himself "culturally Christian" but that he has never personally identified as a Christian, and called his religion Odinism.
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work=
(
help)There are sources from 2011 that promote speculation and conjecture about a manifesto, asserting that Breivik may be a possible Christian
There are two sources from 2015 that are a direct quote of the killer saying that he is not a Christian and that he is an Odinist.
Per WP:LABEL and WP:SYNTH, wikipedia should not synthesize speculation from 2011 about "cultural chrisitan" into the loaded label "Christian terrorist".
The conflicting evidence from 2015 should be presented later on in the lead section, rather than the first sencence pronouncing "Chrisitan terrorist" when later contradicted by claims of Odinism later in the lead section.
In the absence of clear, explicit declarations in reliable, secondary sources that expressly declare "Christian terrorist" then the phrase should not be used in the lead section due to contradictory evidence from 2015 that he is an Odinist.Note that the dagen.no source says that «kristen terrorist» is a dubious label (Nov 2015).
-- Callinus ( talk) 01:04, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Also note, I don't have good sourcing, but there are limited articles saying that what Varg Vikernes is linked to is Neo-völkisch movements - the political pan-Germanic neo-paganism used as a form of ethnic nationalist - Neo-völkisch movements#Nordic racial paganism. Some blogs link Breivik's Odinist beliefs to earlier nordic racial paganism.
-- Callinus ( talk) 02:59, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Shouldn't the article (not the title, but throughout the article) say his new last name? Cbswagman ( talk) 00:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Breivik has changed the his name to Fjotolf Hansen. The article should probably be moved to the new name. -- Ugly Ketchup ( talk) 18:05, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
In the opening paragraph it mentions that in the second evaluation Breivik was only diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder. Considering that antisocial personality disorder is more associated with violence, wouldn't it be just as worthy of note, if not, more?
Currently : a second evaluation concluded that he was not psychotic during the attacks but did have narcissistic personality disorder. [1] [2]
Proposed : a second evaluation concluded that he was not psychotic during the attacks but did have narcissistic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder. [1] [2]
Parafron-trodaí ( talk) 11:39, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Parafron-trodaí
References
[8]. Yes, these people were mentioned in his "manifesto". But they were not really relevant to the crime judging from the cited sources. This is a WP:BLP problem with regard to people who were mentioned by Breivik. My very best wishes ( talk) 19:09, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Rv, not being as bad as the Islamic state doesn't mean someone convicted of terrorism and described by RS as a terrorist isn't a terrorist. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 01:55, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Don't we have any actual pictures of breivik rather than some computerized sketch ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:CA:8200:34A:3DC0:8421:5200:8BE0 ( talk) 22:33, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes, we have. But people refuses to change it because people that wrote this page is fan og Behring Breivik and doesn't want to let us see how he looks today; fat and bald. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.52.206.106 ( talk) 20:50, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Odds are that any modern photographs are copyrighted, so in any case, the portraits he had in his manifesto could be used, right? It should fall under fair use. Not sure, though. 180app ( talk) 14:12, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't the "sketch" fall under original research? -- Veggies ( talk) 20:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
I am just curious to understand why the article is not renamed Fjotolf Hansen, which this man legally changed his name to in 2017. As far as I am aware, Bradley Manning changed her name to Chelsea Manning, and the Wikipedia page changed too
/info/en/?search=Chelsea_Manning
So what is the official Wikipedia protocol, does a name change need to include a sex change, or is it not recognised if a prisoner does it? Thank you TerminatorXtotheEdgeofPanic ( talk) 11:49, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't really find this article to be right. Everyone is described as the victim of Anders. But what has to be remembered is the Anders was the victims of a heavily emotionally and psycologicaly (probably also sexually) abusive mother. And had the Child Welfare Services not been that ineffective he would have been placed into foster care between age 2-4 and had had a chance at a normal life. If Norway learned anything from all of this, then it is that Barnevernet is now internationally known for taking children away that are at risk of being abused rather then abandoning them and leaving them in the care of their abusive parents. Which is a very good thing. And this should be known internationally as well. Anders developed into being a serial killer because of his terrible mother. His mother in turn had also been abandoned by her community, family and Child Welfare Services and had a horrible childhood as well. It is important to take care of the children of your nation in order to avoid disasters like his. I also really despise how his mother is portrayed in this article as a victim of him. She was clearly a perpetrator. -- Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 12:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
If you really want a solution: "One Kuda Without Company", as monotheism teaches. I do believe this requires some thinking on absolute rules. Breivik seems also to symbolize having the aids illness. His name change seems to imply "I am sorry". And also questions if he rather should be lobotomized. Old Zyr customs would indicate a lobotomy longer back, while the islamic "Kuda" signifies everything we want in politics these days. Incl. this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:FE0:C700:2:781F:1A82:338:D2B7 ( talk) 15:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
After someone forks out the "Civil trial against Norway's government" section, one can start streamlining the current article by changing the beginning of that section:
"During 15—18 March 2016, Breivik sued Norway's government was the plaintiff in a
civil trial. The
Ministry of Justice and Public Security was the defendant in court, since the Correctional Service (which was being sued) was su bordinate to the ministry. The verdict was appealed; the appellate court rendered its verdict, and the supreme court decided not to hear the case."
(Text should be forked into a title such as Anders Behring Breivik's civil trial against Norway's government.) 89.8.121.26 ( talk) 12:38, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
I've tagged a huge section on Breivik's mother and likely child abuse because it all originated from one source. The material is covered far more succinctly where it should be, in his early life section. Should this additional section be removed? Unknown Temptation ( talk) 22:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
"A contrary view, on website Decryptedmatrix.com (in 2012), claimed that Belarusian opposition figure Mikhail Reshetnikov is claiming that Breivik underwent paramilitary training in a camp organised by retired KGB colonel Valery Lunev. According to Reshetnikov, Breivik visited Belarus three times and had lasting connections with the country."
This stuff likely aint adequate for "the wikipedia project started by Jimbo Wales". Someone - please put the article out of its misery! 89.8.181.23 ( talk) 21:01, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Emir of Wikipedia ( talk) 20:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
So a "young couple", that was young in the 1980s, talked to police after the 2011 murders.
The source does not say, that the following was any indication of sexual abuse (rather than a mother's odd attempt at commenting about the boy not having male role-models or whatever, in the home).
'Breivik was then placed [by authority of the Child Welfare Service,] with a young couple. This couple later told police that the mother, when bringing two-year-old Breivik to the house, had asked that he be allowed to touch the man's penis because he had no one to compare himself to in terms of appearance; "He only saw [or was used to seeing girls' pee holes—] jentetisser", the mother told the couple, according to the couple's statement [in 2011 or 2012] to police'.
Source: https://www.tv2.no/a/8142855/. Retrieved 9 April 2021.
Does the paragraph have any importance for the rest of the wiki-article?
Are there valid arguments for us saying, "Nevertheless, one sees value of keeping this information in the article - however isolated the information might seem"? 89.8.103.8 ( talk) 08:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
(One is not arguing the importance of keeping, "Breivik was then placed [by authority of the Child Welfare Service,] with a young couple."). 89.8.103.8 ( talk) 08:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
"While still a juvenile, he was arrested [for spraying paint on a wall], and was consequently rejected from not conscripted into the Norwegian Armed Forces. At the age of 20 he joined [a politcial party], the anti-immigration/right-wing
Progress Party, and chaired the local Vest Oslo branch of the party's youth organization during 2002. He left the Progress Party in 2006 and went on to join a gun club, while also founding a company which he used to finance his planned terrorist attacks."
Looks like, walks like, and quacks like cherrypicking. 89.8.79.123 ( talk) 15:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Suggested justification for anyone that removes "Height" from infobox: "His height is not mentioned in the article itself", or "There are no sources present, that indicate that his height contributed to the body count of his crimes", or "Notability (of height) not shown". 89.8.78.46 ( talk) 08:10, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
The following type of edit remark, arguably leaves room for improvement: "remove hidden comment adding vandalism". @ Werkenone: 89.8.100.33 ( talk) 20:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Is he also a wiki-notable rhetorician? ( Expo (magazine) might not be a good enough source to indicate wiki-notability in regard to rhetoric.)
He is a Nazi and that's mentioned in the lede. Why should puffery remain in the lede, regarding "support ethno-nationalists"? (Having in the lede, a shortlist of Nazi groups that he supports - that might be a similar sort of puffery that the lede does not need.)
Suggested move to discussion:
"and uses counterjihadist rhetoric to support ethno-nationalists". 89.8.94.166 ( talk) 04:58, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
While in prison, Breivik's religion allegedly has changed from whatever - to
Odinism.
It arguably is reasonable to move "Odinism" out of the lede, and into some other section.
89.8.94.62 (
talk)
12:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
In August 2021 the lede of the article was changed from van bomb to "car bomb". Please anyone, put "van bomb" back into the lead (and then feel free to take further issue to the talk page, regarding if the article should call the 3.5 ton cargo van (that has a cabin that arguably is isolated from the cargo room), a car). @ Werkenone: 89.8.179.219 ( talk) 07:58, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Just as "von" in German, "van" means honorifics in Dutch like van Dessel [van Bomb], so let's say it differently. IP special:Contributions/89.8.0.0/16 once and for all, please stop placing <-- XXX --> comments in any and all articles, PLEASE remove desired content directly. WP:BEBOLD. Werkenone ( talk) 07:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Source [11] from 2022 that explains that Norwegian law mandates that prisoners in preventive detention, who have been refused parole must be indicted again. 84.48.174.53 ( talk) 12:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Has he on January 18 denied responsibility or not? Does media's experts think that his answer on that point, is ambiguous?
Original quote, according
[12] to
NRK: "– Jeg som menneske utførte handlingene i den grad at jeg lot meg radikalisere, og det er til en viss grad min skyld".
I am not convinced that his whole testimony contains one major (and clear) idea about him having much guilt for the massacre/terrorism in 2011. Some other RS will chime in.
89.8.89.15 (
talk)
15:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Excessively wordy and not very easy to read.
Solipsism 101 (
talk)
18:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Moved to discussion:
sksoker
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).Andresen
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).nrk1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).He has not registered any political party (yet) (as of his trial testimony in 2022). Furthermore he says that his occupation is: candidate for parliamentary elections, in regard to an (unnamed) Nazi party.
If one wants to say more than that - then there have to be sources to back that up; for now the wiki-article does not have inline sourcing for saying more than that.
89.8.118.74 (
talk)
16:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Please anyone, be bold and move to discussion, the following
Authorities in relevant news today: Kriminalomsorgsdirektoratet ( KDI). Source: NRK at 11.59 today.--Stuff that deals with Breivik, is (arguably) normally presented to media by underlying agencies.--However, I don't think we need the name of the agency etc. in regard to the events from today, that the article mentions. 89.8.88.119 ( talk) 16:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC) 89.8.88.119 ( talk) 16:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Since the hearing started, I see that one or multiple users (it's unclear because anon) have been updating the article frequently regarding the events. Please don't do that - Wikipedia is not a newspaper. It's also not a transcript. While some of the content is encyclopaedic, most of it isn't. -- Xurizuri ( talk) 13:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
The prison that he is scheduled to be moved to - on a day that the public will not have advance information about - is not a "stone's throw away from Utøya".--There is a plan that Breivik will be moved from Skien Prison; for now I don't think we need that information about distances - and possibly not ever. 89.8.88.119 ( talk) 15:34, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Someone has added the category Norwegian Zionist. I'm not going to revert as I'm new to Wikipedia but I really don't think that this is correct? Would someone with more knowledge of WP policy please take a look? Knitsey ( talk) 17:58, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply jpg. Knitsey ( talk) 16:43, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Waffling text?
Page sizes:
— Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Moved out of article - waiting for spin-off article about 2016 trial (where the moved info might belong):
"Breivik talked about the parties NFP and NL; he said that those later changed name to ["
Nordic State" or] Nordiske stat. "<ref name="sksoker" /> --Justification: "Re: In Breivik's imagination there exist a political party. The non-important info, hereby moved to talk page, waiting to become part of spin-off article. Rmv
2001:2020:8317:D49F:A8B4:361D:AB95:D2EB (
talk) 01:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)/
2001:2020:8317:D49F:A8B4:361D:AB95:D2EB (
talk) 01:13, 21 March 2023 (UTC)/
2001:2020:8317:D49F:A8B4:361D:AB95:D2EB (
talk)
01:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
sksoker
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).auto3
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).expressen1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).should be 4 paragraphs per the mos toobigtokale ( talk) 03:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
where it says 'Anders Breivik is a Norwegian far-right wing terrorist' @ tha beginning of tha article, may we please add is a 'far-right wing terrorist & a neo-Nazi', cuz he has said that he was a neo-Nazi? Monkeylady999 ( talk) 21:09, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
He is not suing the Correctional Service.--Not sure that this wiki-article has yet explained how the Correctional Service formally gets involved.--I will inform this talk page, if sources pop up that are illuminate that part of the process. 46.15.118.28 ( talk) 19:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Two quotes from the article:
"His declared assets in 2007 were about NKr 630,000 (US$76,244)"
".. in 2009 and his assets amounted to 390,000 kroner ($72,063)"
I'm trying to make sense of this, any help? 77.169.177.105 ( talk) 22:58, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Andersnordic has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 11 § Andersnordic until a consensus is reached.
Ivanvector (
Talk/
Edits)
18:04, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
"On the day of the attacks, Breivik emailed a compendium of texts entitled 2083: A European Declaration of Independence, describing his militant ideology." -> Seems important to know who he emailed, and looks weird this way. Douweziel ( talk) 03:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
According to Dagbladet, journalist Martine Aurdal, Breivik cried in court 12 years (before 2024). The source says that then when Breivik cried, "he became touched by his own propaganda-movie, that was shown during the terror-trial after "July 22".--My point is that the one of the 2024 trial's main narrative seems to have become that 'none of the government witnesses has ever seen Breivik cry'.--Without trying to sound insensitive, the 2024 trial section, should maybe not focus on '69 tears in heaven, but none from Breivik' etc.--If this post is regarded as helpful, then fine.--I am not sure yet, that the sources are only saying that 'no one really thinks that Breivik has showed any remorse in 2024, even though some commentators think that they saw a few tears'. But the wind might sort of be blowing in that direction.--Source (about tears, 12 years ago): www.dagbladet.no/meninger/ingen-grater-med-breivik/80793496, Retrieved today. 46.15.98.20 ( talk) 22:17, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
WAY too much detail about the 2024 trial. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. --jpgordon 𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 16:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I am assuming that the English translation of the word, might stay in the article. (The word was said by one of the prison official on Day 3 of the trial in 2024.)--'Some sort of leader-figure' is not really what is being said--For now, the closest translation might be "someone in the category of leadership".--The word, i think, could be used to describe someone who one is not sure if is a leader (of an organisation), but on the surface it seems that perhaps the person is a leader (of an organisation).--Anyway, translating to "leader figure", would be going to far, i feel; i am guessing that the witness knows other precise words for various kinds of 'leader-type people'.--Note: some words have been in use for decades, but might not be in any major dictionaries.--The word has been around for decades, and i would say that it has not changed its meaning (for that time).--Conclusion: "leader figure", was not what the witness said.--If this post was helpful, then fine.
46.15.99.40 (
talk)
05:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Leader-like figure, is what I have landed at, for now.
46.15.96.109 (
talk)
15:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
On (the middle of) Day 4, the judge had some questions for Breivik about the woman with the petting-dog or RedCross-dog.--The question was not if the government had brought in a woman (with a dog), to make the man's juices flow, or make the man hot-to-trot.--The newspaper's view is that Breivik tried to chat her up (and she revealed that she is not single, and has kids).--For now, I am not seeing that the commentators are making much of the RedCross-dog etc and the judge's question.--Seems that no priceless testimony to see, right here, for now.--Source, Nettavisen, nettavisen.no/nyheter/breivik-saksoker-staten/s/5-95-1557595. 46.15.96.109 ( talk) 16:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
"Breivik announced that he did not recognize the legitimacy of the court and therefore did not accept its decision—he decided not to appeal, saying this would legitimize the authority of the Oslo District Court".--Can all this stuff be moved out of the lede? (I, for one, am fine with move.) 46.15.96.152 ( talk) 22:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
"The verdict [was] appealed [and a final verdict exists], and Breivik and his lawyer [launched] a lawsuit (in a non-Norwegian court) regarding the conditions of his imprisonment and alleged violations of the European Convention on Human Rights, [and the last-mentioned lawsuit, was not heard in court]."
Can something be done to this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.93.252.223 ( talk) 12:51, 24 February 2024 (UTC)