![]() | Vlaams Blok has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Is this correct: "Because of Belgian funding laws the party was effectively banned."? Has the party been really banned? I don't think so. Can anybody confirm? -- Edcolins 19:28, 6 May 2004 (UTC) No, this would not be deemed correct, the party didn't receive any fundings form the government anymore becasue of the law but the party changed their name and refurbished their program to align more to central right wing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.203.215.254 ( talk) 17:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Above part removed. Needs confirmation. Not what is reported in [1] ( IHT): "The verdict cannot lead to an immediate ban on the party"... -- Edcolins 19:40, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
Some details on the "cordon sanitaire" (the ban by other parties that doesn't allow a coalition between Vlaams Blok and other parties) should definitely be discussed on the Vlaams Blok page. -- Aliekens
The verdict got confirmed [2] but the head of the flemish parlament says he is not willing to kill the funding of the party. -- pvaneynd 14:26, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The banned question; The VB itself has nog legal identity. Three non-profit organisations that formed the core of the VB (funding, propaganda, etc) were charged for racism in the VB trial. (Racisme commited between 1999 and 2001 (when the trial started)). The result was a conviction and a fine. That was it. No further implications. The party hasn't been banned and judges can't do that in Belgium. However, there is legislation (it is already voted and published but without the needed "executable decisions") in the pipeline that could deny racist parties their subsidies. The arrest of 17 november could not lead to a loss of subsidies, because there were no executables (sorry, but I don't the Englis term - if there is one - for this juridical concept) for the law. From the juridical point of view, the VB only needed to cease comiting racist crimes. The 17 november arrest did lead to the creation of a "new" party, the Vlaams Belang. This was a carefull prepared marketing move. The party's organisation is still the same, but the leaders try to look softer. (Hoping that this will eventually lead to a coalition with other parties). There are also some other mistakes in the article, more nuance is needed in regarding to the institutional structure of Belgium, and very little is said about the driving forces after the success of the VB.
Is Vlaams Blok an antisemitic political party? I tend to believe it is the case when I read from the article:
Also supported by the Guardian [3]. The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-Semitism and Racism at Tel Aviv University wrote about Vlaams Blok:
In other words; The Stephen Roth Institute is racist!
The burden of proof is on you to explain why Vlaams Blok would not be antisemitic despite these elements. -- Edcolins 22:24, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
typical - what about this - here's your proof - you're still alive!
your opinion has no value, as you have no facts. = your remarks are racist!
where are the links, the quotes, the proof??
Thank god you're not in officialy politics. This is a great example of the µDumb propaganda VB has been spreading for over 30 years. VB is a neo-nazi, fascist Scam (started by Gladio Gangmembers if you ask me). Probeer ook eens serieuze uitleg te schrijven in plaats van 1 zin exclusief gramatica. Maakt Vlaanderen nog wat belachelijker en vooral blijven roepen en tieren.
Anonymous I.P. added here on Nov 25-26, 2004 a long text which is a mere copy of a blog entry elsewhere (by the same author, I suspect). Original here. Removed from this talk page by --FvdP 17:24, 13 May 2005 (UTC).
Like it was done for Vlaams Belang, this article should probably move to Vlaams Blok (short discussion in Talk:Vlaams Belang#Name). I can't do that because [Vlaams Blok] already redirects to here : admin wanted. --FvdP 17:29, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
I agree. Why hasn't this been done yet? 1652186 16:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I changed far-right to right-wing. Nothing in this article shows Vlaams Blok is "far-right", and that term isn't much more than an invective, anyway. I also took out "The party had been characterised by the international media as being neo-nazi, racist and openly antisemitic"—this kind of broad generalization needs to be sourced, if it is to be included at all. - Nat Kraus e 08:25, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
That party was/is widely considered an "extreme-right" party in Belgium, to the point that there is an agreement between all other (mainstream) Flemish parties not to make coalitions with it. Until now, this agreement extends to the current successor of Flemish Block : Flemish Interest. That (at least) should be mentioned, IMO. --FvdP 16:53, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
As with all other nationalist parties, they seem all to be lobbed in with 'extreme right wing' or 'the far right', even though most of these parties have economic policies that are 'extreme left wing'. This all stems from the propaganda since 1945 that the NSDAP of Hitler was 'extreme right wing' when on average, considering it's policies it should be considered 'centre-left'. Labeling the Flemish Block 'extreme right wing' is socialist POV. -- Marcel1975 21:32, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
This article does not have the same kind of NPOV equilibrum obtained in the new Vlaams Belang article. Please refer to the talk page of that article for more information. 1652186 16:50, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Is some vague, unspecified charge of 'racism' really the equivalent of raping a child? Moreover, if 'racism' in the Vlaams Blok sense -- i.e. that Flanders should be preserved for Flemish people -- then normal people everywhere outside of the West are 'racist' , e.g. Japan, Han Chinese in Singapore, India. None of these countries allows significant levels of immigration of those not of their ethic/racial group. Let me correct, the Han Chinese of Singapor manipulate immigration to ensure their continuing majority in that city-state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.143.31.56 ( talk) 20:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Could somebody please explain for non-dutch/flemish speakers, the difference between 'Vlaams' and 'Vlaamse'? Why is the page located at 'Vlaams Blok' but the article begins 'Vlaamse Blok'?
But Steve Jobs' co-workers aren't Apples ... ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.165.195.246 ( talk) 02:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jezhotwells ( talk) 00:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: Two found and fixed. [5] Jezhotwells ( talk) 00:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Linkrot: Two found and repaired. [6] Jezhotwells ( talk) 00:26, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vlaams Blok. 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) 17:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Vlaams Blok has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Is this correct: "Because of Belgian funding laws the party was effectively banned."? Has the party been really banned? I don't think so. Can anybody confirm? -- Edcolins 19:28, 6 May 2004 (UTC) No, this would not be deemed correct, the party didn't receive any fundings form the government anymore becasue of the law but the party changed their name and refurbished their program to align more to central right wing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.203.215.254 ( talk) 17:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Above part removed. Needs confirmation. Not what is reported in [1] ( IHT): "The verdict cannot lead to an immediate ban on the party"... -- Edcolins 19:40, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
Some details on the "cordon sanitaire" (the ban by other parties that doesn't allow a coalition between Vlaams Blok and other parties) should definitely be discussed on the Vlaams Blok page. -- Aliekens
The verdict got confirmed [2] but the head of the flemish parlament says he is not willing to kill the funding of the party. -- pvaneynd 14:26, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The banned question; The VB itself has nog legal identity. Three non-profit organisations that formed the core of the VB (funding, propaganda, etc) were charged for racism in the VB trial. (Racisme commited between 1999 and 2001 (when the trial started)). The result was a conviction and a fine. That was it. No further implications. The party hasn't been banned and judges can't do that in Belgium. However, there is legislation (it is already voted and published but without the needed "executable decisions") in the pipeline that could deny racist parties their subsidies. The arrest of 17 november could not lead to a loss of subsidies, because there were no executables (sorry, but I don't the Englis term - if there is one - for this juridical concept) for the law. From the juridical point of view, the VB only needed to cease comiting racist crimes. The 17 november arrest did lead to the creation of a "new" party, the Vlaams Belang. This was a carefull prepared marketing move. The party's organisation is still the same, but the leaders try to look softer. (Hoping that this will eventually lead to a coalition with other parties). There are also some other mistakes in the article, more nuance is needed in regarding to the institutional structure of Belgium, and very little is said about the driving forces after the success of the VB.
Is Vlaams Blok an antisemitic political party? I tend to believe it is the case when I read from the article:
Also supported by the Guardian [3]. The Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-Semitism and Racism at Tel Aviv University wrote about Vlaams Blok:
In other words; The Stephen Roth Institute is racist!
The burden of proof is on you to explain why Vlaams Blok would not be antisemitic despite these elements. -- Edcolins 22:24, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
typical - what about this - here's your proof - you're still alive!
your opinion has no value, as you have no facts. = your remarks are racist!
where are the links, the quotes, the proof??
Thank god you're not in officialy politics. This is a great example of the µDumb propaganda VB has been spreading for over 30 years. VB is a neo-nazi, fascist Scam (started by Gladio Gangmembers if you ask me). Probeer ook eens serieuze uitleg te schrijven in plaats van 1 zin exclusief gramatica. Maakt Vlaanderen nog wat belachelijker en vooral blijven roepen en tieren.
Anonymous I.P. added here on Nov 25-26, 2004 a long text which is a mere copy of a blog entry elsewhere (by the same author, I suspect). Original here. Removed from this talk page by --FvdP 17:24, 13 May 2005 (UTC).
Like it was done for Vlaams Belang, this article should probably move to Vlaams Blok (short discussion in Talk:Vlaams Belang#Name). I can't do that because [Vlaams Blok] already redirects to here : admin wanted. --FvdP 17:29, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
I agree. Why hasn't this been done yet? 1652186 16:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I changed far-right to right-wing. Nothing in this article shows Vlaams Blok is "far-right", and that term isn't much more than an invective, anyway. I also took out "The party had been characterised by the international media as being neo-nazi, racist and openly antisemitic"—this kind of broad generalization needs to be sourced, if it is to be included at all. - Nat Kraus e 08:25, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
That party was/is widely considered an "extreme-right" party in Belgium, to the point that there is an agreement between all other (mainstream) Flemish parties not to make coalitions with it. Until now, this agreement extends to the current successor of Flemish Block : Flemish Interest. That (at least) should be mentioned, IMO. --FvdP 16:53, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
As with all other nationalist parties, they seem all to be lobbed in with 'extreme right wing' or 'the far right', even though most of these parties have economic policies that are 'extreme left wing'. This all stems from the propaganda since 1945 that the NSDAP of Hitler was 'extreme right wing' when on average, considering it's policies it should be considered 'centre-left'. Labeling the Flemish Block 'extreme right wing' is socialist POV. -- Marcel1975 21:32, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
This article does not have the same kind of NPOV equilibrum obtained in the new Vlaams Belang article. Please refer to the talk page of that article for more information. 1652186 16:50, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Is some vague, unspecified charge of 'racism' really the equivalent of raping a child? Moreover, if 'racism' in the Vlaams Blok sense -- i.e. that Flanders should be preserved for Flemish people -- then normal people everywhere outside of the West are 'racist' , e.g. Japan, Han Chinese in Singapore, India. None of these countries allows significant levels of immigration of those not of their ethic/racial group. Let me correct, the Han Chinese of Singapor manipulate immigration to ensure their continuing majority in that city-state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.143.31.56 ( talk) 20:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Could somebody please explain for non-dutch/flemish speakers, the difference between 'Vlaams' and 'Vlaamse'? Why is the page located at 'Vlaams Blok' but the article begins 'Vlaamse Blok'?
But Steve Jobs' co-workers aren't Apples ... ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.165.195.246 ( talk) 02:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jezhotwells ( talk) 00:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: Two found and fixed. [5] Jezhotwells ( talk) 00:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Linkrot: Two found and repaired. [6] Jezhotwells ( talk) 00:26, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Vlaams Blok. 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) 17:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)