This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jean-Claude Juncker article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A news item involving Jean-Claude Juncker was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 14 July 2013. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Lamberhurst, Therequiembellishere -
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
.
For both of you. You're both sensible veteran editors. Common sense would be that, if you don't understand what the other means with their edit summaries, or if you figure the other person didn't understand yours, or that for whatever other reason edit summaries evidently don't suffice to solve the problem, you stop reverting and start talking. It takes two to edit war, and nothing being warred over here is so dramatically urgent it's time to start Ignoring all rules. There's no vandalism. There's no BLP-vios. There's no copyvios. The world, and wikipedia, will survive if the Wrong Version stands for an hour or two while the two of you discuss the issue.
Regarding the edit summaries: Relgion isn't a username. It's a typo. 'Religion at Village Pump' is what I make of it. Refers to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 126#RfC: Religion in biographical infoboxes. Explanation at IPs talkpage is mildly jumbled (a couple of linebreaks would've helped) but generally makes sense. The 'dummy edit' referred to is the edit immediately subsequent to the short-and-misspelled 'Relgion at Village Pump'.
Full, corrected message thus reads: 'Religion at Village Pump. No caption. MP info incomplete and clutter. Birth name is title. Party info is overwrought and unnecessary and not standard until one editor started. No children. Parent not notable. Not a huge fan of OVERLINK in general'. This explains the removal of everything user removed, but is pretty shorthand (happens often with edit summaries) and in a few cases presumes the editor reading it will know what it means. I'll have to admit that it's not exactly the easiest to parse and required some good looking at the edit and summary simultaneously.
A full translation would be along the lines of "No religion in infobox. See April 2016 Village Pump (Policy) decision. There is no caption, nor is it needed, so I'm removing the empty parameter. The ministerial posts information is cluttered and there's stuff missing, so I fixed it. Birth name parameter is only used for someone's full name, and even then, only when said name is not the title. That doesn't apply here, so removing it. There is no need for European Party information in the infobox and never used to be there until one editor started adding it everywhere. It just clutters things up. Parent, children (and sibling) parameters are only used when those people are independently notable, which isn't the case here, thus removing them. I'm not really a fan of the overlinking guideline, (but as can be seen next edit, I'm willing to concede on that one)."
Now, could the both of you please stop warring, stop cluttering my watchlist and start talking? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jean-Claude Juncker. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:44, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jean-Claude Juncker. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:04, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jean-Claude Juncker. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Just noticed his religion was missing, I am not too familiar with the wiki format. Could someone add his religion to the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:CF:8200:52A3:9149:925A:F40A:C262 (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Today he showed serious issues, possible due to too much drink/drug: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oecvYFq_wi0 Should be mentioned this in the article. 91.82.60.121 (talk) 20:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Something should be in here on his health issues at least. he claims to have previously been injured and a wheelchair user for an extended period [3]. We can't know whether the problem is alcoholism or illness/injury, but the injury is not an explanation of past bizarre behaviour. --Amh15 (talk) 11:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
At some point however this should be transformed in a section about personal style and "features", where to mention some commonly mentioned characteristics such as outspoken, unconventional (cf. remarks on preferring to be seen as drunk than ill, last state of the union address, spat with Tajani, jokes and translation failures speaking in multiple languages), described alternatively as unfit or as an "old sly fox" (see today [1] [2]). --Nemo 22:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
References
The pronunciation of the name Junker given in this page is incorrect. The correct pronunciation starts with the Viced palato-alveolar fricative:[ʒ] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremygardn (talk • contribs) 09:30, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Seems kind of interesting there's no family history here for a supreme leader of the EU. Why is this whole article his political life and nothing about him personally? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7012:A900:455:191E:73E1:17D2 (talk) 02:29, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
If sciatica is claimed as the cause of JCJ's unsteady gait, a scientific reference that gives unsteady gait as a symptom of sciatica should be provided. I suggest changing the sentence about Sciatica to say that: "JCL claims...", or better yet, the sentence of his drinking should be written first followed with: "JCL claims that the cause of his occasional unsteady gait is sciatica, which reportedly stems from his 1989 accident." AFAIK, as a medical doctor, Sciatica does not cause the symptoms seen with JCJ. Sciatica can result in sharp pain which would prevent him from walking at the time of the pain, not have trouble walking in a straight line. 207.35.173.178 (talk) 15:43, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
This is more of a stylistic criticism, but there is a noticeable asymmetry between the detailed description of some of the allegations against him (i.e. accusing him of turning Luxemburg into a tax avoidance country), and the counter-arguments being omitted (there is no context about why the "motion of censure" was defeated by a large majority, thereby creating an impression that the EU is in some way corrupt).
Also, in what way is "Juncker wants a European army" considered a controversy? At this point, it would be more controversial to oppose a European army...
Finally, sentences like "However, it is not known whether Juncker apologised for his outburst." come across as pointless filler, just to make the section longer.
2001:A61:2A2A:501:C865:22F9:B6BB:2837 (talk) 01:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
The prospect of a European Army was certainly controversial in the UK. Like many things that underpinned Brexit, it probably went entirely over the heads of continental Europeans. It should be extremely easy to source. Poi hatch (talk) 18:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
User:Drmies has summarily removed the entire "Awards and decorations" section, first claiming they are meaningless and unverified [3], now upgraded to a claim their lack of verification in secondary sources poses a risk of harm to Mr Junker. [4] I find these arguments so specious, so easily disproven in a few seconds of Googling even in the case of the honorary degrees [5] (verifiable, non-harmful, exceptionally relevant), I can only conclude Drmies is trying to impose a personal editorial standard on this biography, and is cynically using sound Wikipedia editorial policies (information must be verifiable and not cause harm) to achieve it. Poi hatch (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
I already proved even the Sheffield degree is easily sourced, clearly not harmful and extremely relevant. I put this evidence to you directly, on the talk page as you asked, and you still ignored it. It takes no experience with Wikipedia to see you are abusing Wikipedia policy aimed at preventing actual harm, to justify your personal view of what is important information. Disturbingly, your motive seems deeply personal, some kind of dislike of world leaders in general. So the potential for harm is arguably in allowing you to control the content of this page with a dishonest reading of policy. Your warning to me is simply a continuation of this tactic. It is now proven that you are removing information you know can be verified. I will not play this game. I reject your specious arguments. Poi hatch (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Given the above, I was not surprised to see in this edit [6] that Drmies has applied a personal standard of trivia which totally contradicts the "proper secondary sources" that were provided to support that text and which, in addition to the fact they thought it worth noting at all, do appear to show there is indeed something unusual about his chosen hobby (pinball) that merits it being considered unusual. This is a biography after all. It is meant to give a window into the person as well as record their career. Poi hatch (talk) 18:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)