![]() | 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 1 | Archive 2 |
What is the justification for this category? I can't see anything. She hasn't been in prison, nor is she involved in politics, nor prosecuted or harassed for her political stances.
There isn't a single (reliable) reference outside Wikipedia and its clones using that label either
This is a dangerous precedence because this article makes Wikipedia an original source of facts, which is against its core policies.
For the record: when the category was removed, certain editors inserted it back without any evidence.--
Svetovid (
talk)
11:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the clause "At first, nearly all Slovakian political parties distanced themselves from the case" from the attack section. There really isn't a reason to say that the parties "distanced" themselves. It's not like every attack should have an immediate response from political parties. Now, I don't know Hungarian but could someone fill out more of what the Slovak National Party was doing with the story. Did they encourage it by claiming sympathy, try to claim something else, have some links? The more specific, the better. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 07:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
This is a bit after the moment, but "Distancing yourselves from a case" is perfectly natural good English. It does not mean condemning usually though - it's usually used when the authority makes only a short statement which says the case isn't really any of their business and that they had nothing to do with it. How this affects the article however is up to you guys! Knepflerle ( talk) 12:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The article needs a lot more details about the attack itself. When exactly did Malina speak with Kubla? Did he report her in November 2006 or May 2007? When was the suicide and was it related? Otherwise, it's just random gossip. --
Ricky81682 (
talk)
07:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the unsourced statements about the handwriting analysis because they need sources. Along with the typical procedures, WP:BLP applies as well since these are living people being accused. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 18:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Vladimír Palko, minister of the previous Slovak government, current opposition politician commented on the 2006 press conference alleging that government officials lied in an attempt to discredit Hedvig Malina. Quite a few things were said by him (it was a televised debate), but it was significant as this was the first time a prominent Slovak politician made statements that can be considered supportive of Hedvig Malina. I'll translate some direct quotes if needed. A few sources on this ; [1] [2] [3] [4] Hobartimus ( talk) 01:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
As showed, not a single source in English that is not of Hungarian origin uses the Hungarian version. Of course, her legal name and the name she uses/used (she now changed her surname to another Slovak name) was Hedviga Malinová.
The dispute is obvious and it's here only because certain editors try to use the Hungarian version of the name for some reason. It may be a coincidence that the same editors try to use Hungarian versions of Slovak names as the main names in other articles too.--
Svetovid (
talk)
22:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
After the proclamation of the Kosice program, the German and Hungarian population living in the reborn Czechoslovak state were subjected to various forms of persecution, including: expulsions, deportations, internments, peoples court procedures, citizenship revocations, property confiscation, condemnation to forced labour camps, involuntary changes of nationality and appointment of government managers to German and Hungarian owned businesses and farms, referred to euphemistically as “reslovakization.”
(undent) I don't understand what is the issue. The Hungarian article call her by this name. The English citations don't mention her name. Svetovid, I see cite 10 calls her "Hedviga Malinová" so the Slovakian one also calls her that name. What do you suggest? -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 04:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if the sources using that name are of Hungarian origin. English speakers read English-language texts of all origins - sources don't carry extra weight if they come from certain countries. The rule is simple - we use the names used in English-language sources no matter where they're from because they might be the ones our English-language readers look at and want information on. Please bear this in mind. The relative weight you give to different spellings is up to the relative frequency of the two spellings (again, with no prejudice to origin - we're not here to be "fair" whatever that means, we're here to help people researching stuff they've read in whatever source) but that's a decision for you to make once you've got good evidence of the usage. Knepflerle ( talk) 12:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
You are right, it was there before (see earlier versions), I reinserted it. Problem solved. Squash Racket ( talk) 13:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I commented out "Packa said the attitude of Malina and her lawyer was "the despising of the work of Slovak police", and Kaliňák claimed that Gál was trying to make it into a political issue." per WP:BLP. Let's keep allegations about living people out until a source is provided. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 04:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Since the cell phone thing is a mess with a pile of incorrect sources, I think we need a separate section explaining "sources originally said, police said she lied" and then whether she misspoke or claims that the police were lying about what she said. If you don't mention it in the first section, it makes no sense in the police investigation section. If you do mention it, she looks like a liar unless there is another reason why. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 08:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
...should clearly show that she is a Slovak citizen of Hungarian ethnicity from Slovakia, which my version does and the other doesn't. The other version tries to make her citizenship ambiguous. Why?-- Svetovid ( talk) 13:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Slovak from Slovakia is redundant and her ethnicity has a crucial role in the article. Emphasizing her citizenship in the very first few words blurs the ethnic background of the alleged hate crime. Squash Racket ( talk) 04:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
(copying from User talk:Elonka, in response to a request to provide English translations per WP:RSUE):
Since this article uses multiple non-English sources, it would be a good idea to come up with a consistent way of formatting them. I checked around Wikipedia to see if there's a standard style, but the answer seems to be, "Use whatever style you want, just make it consistent within the article." Or in other words, for an extreme example, if we had an article titled, "Le couleur rouge" in "Le Monde", with a quote, "J'aime cette couleur", we could potentially format it as:
J'aime cette couleur (I like this color)
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)I like this color (J'aime cette couleur)
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)We could also try other styles, like adding the word trans or translation or something. Anyone have a preference? -- El on ka 19:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
That version is OK I think.
Also I would like to point out I was referring to adding back Hungarian titles for the articles. Right now I could count only 4 sources (out of 42) without English titles. I had already translated the article titles, but when I saw the foreign titles in other articles, I didn't know if having these English translations is necessary.
There are about a
dozen English language references, so if you speak English I think you will be able to verify most of the article, but even if not, speaking either Hungarian or Slovak should be sufficient. Still I support adding quotes for the facts that are not supported by an English language source.
Admin Ricky's intervention focused mainly on that article as you can see in talk page sections above and in the page history.
Squash Racket (
talk)
09:38, 24 April 2008 (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 1 | Archive 2 |
What is the justification for this category? I can't see anything. She hasn't been in prison, nor is she involved in politics, nor prosecuted or harassed for her political stances.
There isn't a single (reliable) reference outside Wikipedia and its clones using that label either
This is a dangerous precedence because this article makes Wikipedia an original source of facts, which is against its core policies.
For the record: when the category was removed, certain editors inserted it back without any evidence.--
Svetovid (
talk)
11:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the clause "At first, nearly all Slovakian political parties distanced themselves from the case" from the attack section. There really isn't a reason to say that the parties "distanced" themselves. It's not like every attack should have an immediate response from political parties. Now, I don't know Hungarian but could someone fill out more of what the Slovak National Party was doing with the story. Did they encourage it by claiming sympathy, try to claim something else, have some links? The more specific, the better. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 07:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
This is a bit after the moment, but "Distancing yourselves from a case" is perfectly natural good English. It does not mean condemning usually though - it's usually used when the authority makes only a short statement which says the case isn't really any of their business and that they had nothing to do with it. How this affects the article however is up to you guys! Knepflerle ( talk) 12:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The article needs a lot more details about the attack itself. When exactly did Malina speak with Kubla? Did he report her in November 2006 or May 2007? When was the suicide and was it related? Otherwise, it's just random gossip. --
Ricky81682 (
talk)
07:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I removed the unsourced statements about the handwriting analysis because they need sources. Along with the typical procedures, WP:BLP applies as well since these are living people being accused. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 18:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Vladimír Palko, minister of the previous Slovak government, current opposition politician commented on the 2006 press conference alleging that government officials lied in an attempt to discredit Hedvig Malina. Quite a few things were said by him (it was a televised debate), but it was significant as this was the first time a prominent Slovak politician made statements that can be considered supportive of Hedvig Malina. I'll translate some direct quotes if needed. A few sources on this ; [1] [2] [3] [4] Hobartimus ( talk) 01:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
As showed, not a single source in English that is not of Hungarian origin uses the Hungarian version. Of course, her legal name and the name she uses/used (she now changed her surname to another Slovak name) was Hedviga Malinová.
The dispute is obvious and it's here only because certain editors try to use the Hungarian version of the name for some reason. It may be a coincidence that the same editors try to use Hungarian versions of Slovak names as the main names in other articles too.--
Svetovid (
talk)
22:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
After the proclamation of the Kosice program, the German and Hungarian population living in the reborn Czechoslovak state were subjected to various forms of persecution, including: expulsions, deportations, internments, peoples court procedures, citizenship revocations, property confiscation, condemnation to forced labour camps, involuntary changes of nationality and appointment of government managers to German and Hungarian owned businesses and farms, referred to euphemistically as “reslovakization.”
(undent) I don't understand what is the issue. The Hungarian article call her by this name. The English citations don't mention her name. Svetovid, I see cite 10 calls her "Hedviga Malinová" so the Slovakian one also calls her that name. What do you suggest? -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 04:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if the sources using that name are of Hungarian origin. English speakers read English-language texts of all origins - sources don't carry extra weight if they come from certain countries. The rule is simple - we use the names used in English-language sources no matter where they're from because they might be the ones our English-language readers look at and want information on. Please bear this in mind. The relative weight you give to different spellings is up to the relative frequency of the two spellings (again, with no prejudice to origin - we're not here to be "fair" whatever that means, we're here to help people researching stuff they've read in whatever source) but that's a decision for you to make once you've got good evidence of the usage. Knepflerle ( talk) 12:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
You are right, it was there before (see earlier versions), I reinserted it. Problem solved. Squash Racket ( talk) 13:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I commented out "Packa said the attitude of Malina and her lawyer was "the despising of the work of Slovak police", and Kaliňák claimed that Gál was trying to make it into a political issue." per WP:BLP. Let's keep allegations about living people out until a source is provided. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 04:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Since the cell phone thing is a mess with a pile of incorrect sources, I think we need a separate section explaining "sources originally said, police said she lied" and then whether she misspoke or claims that the police were lying about what she said. If you don't mention it in the first section, it makes no sense in the police investigation section. If you do mention it, she looks like a liar unless there is another reason why. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 08:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
...should clearly show that she is a Slovak citizen of Hungarian ethnicity from Slovakia, which my version does and the other doesn't. The other version tries to make her citizenship ambiguous. Why?-- Svetovid ( talk) 13:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Slovak from Slovakia is redundant and her ethnicity has a crucial role in the article. Emphasizing her citizenship in the very first few words blurs the ethnic background of the alleged hate crime. Squash Racket ( talk) 04:14, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
(copying from User talk:Elonka, in response to a request to provide English translations per WP:RSUE):
Since this article uses multiple non-English sources, it would be a good idea to come up with a consistent way of formatting them. I checked around Wikipedia to see if there's a standard style, but the answer seems to be, "Use whatever style you want, just make it consistent within the article." Or in other words, for an extreme example, if we had an article titled, "Le couleur rouge" in "Le Monde", with a quote, "J'aime cette couleur", we could potentially format it as:
J'aime cette couleur (I like this color)
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)I like this color (J'aime cette couleur)
{{
cite news}}
: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher=
(
help)We could also try other styles, like adding the word trans or translation or something. Anyone have a preference? -- El on ka 19:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
That version is OK I think.
Also I would like to point out I was referring to adding back Hungarian titles for the articles. Right now I could count only 4 sources (out of 42) without English titles. I had already translated the article titles, but when I saw the foreign titles in other articles, I didn't know if having these English translations is necessary.
There are about a
dozen English language references, so if you speak English I think you will be able to verify most of the article, but even if not, speaking either Hungarian or Slovak should be sufficient. Still I support adding quotes for the facts that are not supported by an English language source.
Admin Ricky's intervention focused mainly on that article as you can see in talk page sections above and in the page history.
Squash Racket (
talk)
09:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)