Jump to content

Talk:Jussi Halla-aho

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fan page

[edit]

Obviously a fan page. Halla-aho fans have already infiltrated the Finnish Wikipedia and seen to it that nothing unflattering will be said about Halla-aho.

The Finnish security police (SUPO) has, according to the newspaper Länsiväylä, classified Suomen Sisu as a Nazi organization. This should be pointed out in a page about Halla-aho. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.16.202.19 (talk) 12:08, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to this http://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keskustelu_käyttäjästä:195.16.202.19 and http://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Keskustelu:Iirinkielinen_nykykirjallisuus&diff=prev&oldid=422345 page the previous writer is Panu Höglund, famous Finnish internet troll and very known hater of Mr. Halla-aho. More information about this person: http://vaivihkaavainottu.freehostia.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.114.81.90 (talk) 23:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Out of curiosity, how does one "infiltrate" a public internet resource that is freely accessible for everyone to edit? --Saempy (talk) 12:43, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personality cult in the article

[edit]

Wikipedia's articles are not fan pages, information must be relevant. See fi-wiki's article and its discussion page. See also Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons etc. Corrected article. --Thi (talk) 09:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Information in this article is relevant and had been published by a reliable source. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Censorship because of your political views is not acceptable reason to remove information from the article. Klassikkomies (talk) 11:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

[edit]

User:Thi has disputed the neutrality of the article claiming that this is a fan page. All information in this article have been published by a reliable source so there is no neutrality problem. Same user has earlier removed great amount of neutral information against consensus from the fi-wikipedia's Jussi Halla-aho article and is now trying to do the same thing in this article. This is not acceptable behavior. Seems to me that this is same kind of political attack and attempt to screw with article's neutrality like Panu Höglund's previous attack. Klassikkomies (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fi-wikis current article is consensus article (Klassikkomies had a ban in fi-wiki) and this article must also be neutral. I don't have any political interest, there is no need to insinuate. The article can tell even more about Halla-aho's opinions. The headings, clearer order of the chapters etc. have all been thought and discussed before. Nobody needs to know about peripheral articles which are know in Publications section. They are not even fancruft, just non-neutral rubbish here (Halla-aho is important in Wikipedia only as a politician). When cleaned, the article can only be better for all. --Thi (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fi-wikis article is not consensus article. You have removed information from fi-wikipedias article against consensus claiming that Halla-aho is some kind of "master" and fi-wikipedia's article is not neutral. Also Halla-aho is known in Finland as a blogger not as a politician. Claiming Halla-aho is known as politician is non-neutral rubbish as well as removing his children from the article when Halla-aho himself has told that his children and family are the main reason why he takes part in social debate.[1] Klassikkomies (talk) 04:55, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In Wikipedia politicians are more important than bloggers, so I see your argument quite strange. Halla-aho is a political blogger. I don't have anything particular against the statement you mentioned. But it's not really a political opinion, it's an emotional opinion in an interview, so I'm not sure how it fits to encyclopedia. All people who have children and family do things because of them. In the article it's about political language or rhetoric, not about politics. I think there must be a difference between the rhetoric and the facts. And I think that if the article tells first facts about Halla-aho's political success and then the hype about his blog, the article is more useful as encyclopedic content (his success as a blogger is already mentioned in first chapter). --Thi (talk) 08:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have categories Category:Finnish bloggers, Category:Political weblogs and Category:Blogs critical of Islam. Also there are four sources for Halla-aho's childrens names [2][3][4][5] that you tried to remove from the article and Halla-aho really has told that his children and family are the main reason why he takes part in social debate[6]. So can you finally tell what is the neutrality problem in this article. Klassikkomies (talk) 17:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't misrepresen things. The children's names are removed from Finnish Wikipedia because of privacy. --Thi (talk) 07:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is not Finnish Wikipedia. If Finnish Wikipedia is censored because of users political views english wikipedia is not. See: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored, reliable source and Wikipedia:Verifiability. If you return neutrality tag in the article you must tell what are the neutrality problems in this article. Do not just remove important information that has been published by a reliable source from the article. Publications are important because they are mentioned in other wikipedia articles that are linked here, see: Aromanians, Aromanian language and Vallahades. Klassikkomies (talk) 14:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You know very well what's wrong, because everything have been discussed in Finnish Wikipedia. You can translate the discussion in English, if you want. About "important" information overload, see Wikipedia's policies. Everything is not important. I suggest that you write more about Halla-aho's political opinions. Some random, spammed internet "questions of the day" are not important, political things are. Many Halla-aho's supporters are annoyed because some people highlights their "master's" marvelous "scientific career", as you do. People see what Halla-aho has done in Publications section and article tells that Halla-aho has done some research. Wikipedia's users don't need to swallow preaching. There are more important things to do than waste time to that, such as writing about Halla-aho's views about islam and so on. And the order of the chapters can be better as in Finnish Wikipedia etc. – Halla-aho's two articles can be added to Publications section as fan material, no problem. I guess you have read them, because you have been so interested about them.
Your mention about aromanians etc. is pointless. The book where Halla-aho was an editor, was already in neutral version, nobody questions it. Your linking of Halla-aho's name in bibliographies is needless and in Finnish Wikipedia can be considered as spam (Halla-aho is not a monograph writer in those bibliographies). --Thi (talk) 15:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your headings Political views and Political action are not acceptable and not neutral because Halla-aho is known as a blogger not as politician as I told you before and all this is mentionioned in the sources too. He is not important as a politician and you know it as well as I do. All information in this article has been published by various reliable sources so there is no acceptable reason removing notable information from the article. In Finnish Wikipedia most of the users supported mentioning Halla-aho's articles and information you are trying to remove from this article too but you removed them anyway. This is not acceptable. And I have not highlighted Halla-ahos scientific career in any way, just mentioned the basic facts that the sources mention. Klassikkomies (talk) 16:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If Halla-aho is not important as a politician, he is not important in Wikipedia at all. The headings are used in Finnish Wikipedia and they are perfectly normal and neutral. And I also used the heading "Immigration critic" which you seemingly prefer, so you don't have a need to argue. And Halla-aho's articles were added to the article. Your not-so-important facts were also added. Sources were mentioned in Publications sections. I didn't remove them, as you can see from history. --Thi (talk) 17:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Like I told you earlier we have for categories Category:Finnish bloggers, Category:Political weblogs and Category:Blogs critical of Islam and there are many bloggers in Wikipedia because they are notable bloggers. Stop wandalizing the article and removing sourced notable information from the article, please. Klassikkomies (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Finnish Wikipedia Google rank trivia were considered as "hysterical fancruft". Johanna Tukiainen, Duudsonit etc. were also high in the list, but such trivia is not in their articles. Klassikkomies considers such as notable information.
  • The Helsingin sanomat question is also non-notable. "Verkkosivuilla järjestetään säännöllisesti erilaisia mielipidetiedusteluja, joiden tulokset ovat hyvin epäluotettavia (teknisesti noin miljoonaa tapaa manipuloida tulosta) ja otos pääsääntöisesti epäedustava. Jos nyt lähdettäisiin kuitenkin siitä, että jos galluppeja on pakko siteerata, valitaan sellaisia, jotka ovat menetelmiensä puolesta edes jokseenkin luotettavia." (Joonasl in Fi-Wiki)
  • Nobody has questioned that Halla-aho is not notable political blogger AND a politician.
  • HA has been ONE of the editors.
  • The sources for publications are already in Publications section. No spam to references section. Adding them twice can be considered lying and doing harm to the reader. Halla-aho's web page as reference is enough.

At the moment, these are the biggest problems in the article. If these things are removed (I corrected these things in the article), the current neutrality problem is solved and I will not edit article any more. If there is other problems, somebody else must correct them. And I warn you, don't call normal editing as vandalizing, please. --Thi (talk) 18:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Damn right it is notable that in 2008, Google Inc. announced that "Jussi Halla-aho" is the fifth most popular Google search of all Finnish people excluding music personalities.[7] Because of that fact this article was also nominated at Did you know by User:Mifter to be featured on the main page. See: User:Mifter/DYK.
  • And surely it is notable that in November 2008 the biggest newspaper in Finland Helsingin Sanomat asked its readers "Is Jussi Halla-aho right in his immigration criticism?" (in fact it was Helsingin Sanomat's the question of the day) and during 24 hours 11,473 people participated in Helsingin Sanomat's survey; 66% answered yes and 34% no.[8]
  • Slavica Helsingiensia and Journal of Indo-European Studies 33 that you removed are reliable sources and must be returned to the article. Using reliable sources for the facts presented in the article is not spam.
  • Also there are four sources for Halla-aho's childrens names [9][10][11][12] that you tried to remove from the article and Halla-aho really has told that his children and family are the main reason why he takes part in social debate[13].

I have told you these facts for several times. Is it really so difficult to understand this? Seems to me that these facts are so called good publicity and you want to remove them from the article because of your political views and that is not acceptable. Because there are no acceptable reasons for removing these notable and important facts from the article information must be returned to the article. Klassikkomies (talk) 19:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Everybody knows that trivia and fancruft are big problem in English Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Relevance of content.
  • Wikipedian artikkeleihin ei lisätä roskamerkintöjä. Artikkelit on mainittu artikkelissa, ja huijaava viitteistys on käytäntöjen vastaista. The publications are already in Publications section. Users don't need them as a reference, because they are already in front of their eyes.
  • The children's names are in the article which I edited. My edit is a compromise. Someone else can neutralize the article more, if they don't fear the aggression of Klassikkomies.
  • You want to say those things about children. That doesn't mean that it is encyclopedic content. The encyclopedic article doesn't say random, selected things. They contain relevant information.
  • Do not spam, vandalize or make unnecessary threats in user's discussion pages.

I recommend to lock the article. From the guideline: Do not threaten people: For example, threatening people with "admins you know" or having them banned for disagreeing with you. --Thi (talk) 20:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have approved that Halla-aho's children's names are mentioned in the article and approved the headings, but you want to remove the following sentences claiming that they are trivia and fancruft and they make this article a fan page:

  • "In 2008, Google Inc. announced that "Jussi Halla-aho" is the fifth most popular Google search of all Finnish people excluding music personalities."[14]
  • "In November 2008, Helsingin Sanomat asked its readers "Is Jussi Halla-aho right in his immigration criticism?" (it was Helsingin Sanomat's the question of the day). During 24 hours 11,473 people participated in Helsingin Sanomat's survey; 66% answered yes and 34% no."[15]

Do you claim that

  • Google Inc. is Halla-aho's fan? or
  • Helsingin Sanomat is Halla-aho's fan? or
  • Finland's biggest newspaper's Helsingin Sanomat's question of the day is not important? or
  • Google Inc.'s announcement is not important? or what?

Klassikkomies (talk) 20:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I say that they are not in Finnish Wikipedia's article because of consensus. They have been discussed there before, and only you want them to the article. If other editors recommend to remove things, it is usually a sign that the content is not relevant (Who in US or China or Sweden is interested about Halla-aho's children's names, if they are not even in Finnish Wikipedia?). I have also suggested more content about Halla-aho's opinions. I think that such views as professor emeritus Tuomo Martikainen's statement are relevant and could be in the article. I have compromized much, but internet poll is just trivia. Nobody remembers it after a while. --Thi (talk) 21:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is not Finnish Wikipedia, but I have to say that many user's in Finnish Wikipedia supported mentioning these relevant facts in the article. Also many users wrote to your talk page and warned you because you constantly removed relevant information from the Finnish Wikipedia's Jussi Halla-aho article.[16]. But could you finally answer my questions? Klassikkomies (talk) 21:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You did it, and you had a block from Finnish Wikipedia because of your behaviour (and one young user, who got a block, he was that "many"). There were also much discussion, and many users considered that your behaviour was not accepetable. See also Wikipedia:Talk#Good_practice and Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments for better future. This is my final note. --Thi (talk) 21:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to mention this: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_people#Presumption_in_favor_of_privacy. --Thi (talk) 21:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Users that warned you were Lab-oratory, Korttelikranaatti and me and you got a block in Finnish Wikipedia because of your behaviour. I have questioned this articles neutrality and asked for third opinion and this discussion continues in the next section. Klassikkomies (talk) 23:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Text "...became famous for his texts that criticize immigration and multiculturalism." shoud be changed to "...became famous for his texts that criticize Finland goverment's politics of immigration and multiculturalism.". Jussi Halla-Aho is not against immigration it self but the politics that are known to lead ghettos and increasing violence. In this topic Helsingin Sanomat (or main editor) are often released articles that are ment to disparageing Halla-aho (either intended or unintentional) and so are not to count in reliable sourges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koljki (talk • contribs) 21:14, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Klassikkomies (talk) 21:32, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality 2

[edit]

I have questioned articles neutrality because User:Thi has constantly removed following relevant and neutral facts that have been published by reliable sources from this article:

  • "In 2008, Google Inc. announced that "Jussi Halla-aho" is the fifth most popular Google search of all Finnish people excluding music personalities."[17]
  • "In November 2008, Helsingin Sanomat asked its readers "Is Jussi Halla-aho right in his immigration criticism?" (it was Helsingin Sanomat's the question of the day). During 24 hours 11,473 people participated in Helsingin Sanomat's survey; 66% answered yes and 34% no."[18]

Klassikkomies (talk) 22:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The first fact has also been presented in Wikipedia's front page on 2 January 2009. See: User talk:Mifter#DYK for Jussi Halla-aho. Klassikkomies (talk) 23:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to give my opinion:

  • About the DYK thing, I can't see it here: Wikipedia:Recent_additions_238#January_2_2009. By the way, Halla-aho was asked on TV what he thought about the Google result.
  • The names of Halla-aho's children should be mentioned in the article, because they are mentioned on the front page of Halla-aho's website, and he makes multiple references to his children in his blog, the blog, which he is best known for. Also, there are many other celebrities whose little children's names are mentioned in Wikipedia.
  • The most important hobbies of Halla-aho, at least reading J. R. R. Tolkien, and pistol and rifle shooting, should be mentioned in the article. He mentions them on his front page, and he makes many references about those hobbies and cites Tolkien in his blog, the blog, which he is best known for. Also, Finnish police is considering whether they should review his gun licence.
  • The mentioning about T-shirts should be removed from the sentence He has received positive feedback also from the immigrants and they buy T-shirts that support him. It is not relevant to tell that there are T-shirts about someone, nor to tell who buy them. --Dogah (talk) 15:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion

[edit]

EhJJ (talk · contribs) wants to offer a third opinion. To assist with the process, editors are requested to summarize the dispute in a short sentence below.

Viewpoint by User:Klassikkomies
....

User:Thi wants to remove following relevant and neutral facts that have been published by reliable sources from this article claiming that they are fan material, not neutral and that Halla-aho's children must be protected and their names removed from the article because of their privacy (sources are provided after the sentences):

  • "In 2008, Google Inc. announced that "Jussi Halla-aho" is the fifth most popular Google search of all Finnish people excluding music personalities."[19](Uusi Suomi)
    • This does seem non-notable to me: He was the fifth most popular non-musical Finnish person search term at Google at some time. So what? (EhJJ)TALK
  • "In November 2008, Helsingin Sanomat asked its readers "Is Jussi Halla-aho right in his immigration criticism?" (it was Helsingin Sanomat's the question of the day). During 24 hours 11,473 people participated in Helsingin Sanomat's survey; 66% answered yes and 34% no."[20](Helsingin Sanomat)
    • There is clearly selection bias with this article, but as long as it's clear that this is an online poll, I suppose it can stay. (EhJJ)TALK
  • The names of Halla-aho's children: Hilma (born 2003), Kerttu (2004) and Veikko (2008)[21](Pohjalainen newspaper)[22](Halla-aho's personal web page in English)[23](True Finns of Kontula)[24](Halla-aho's personal web page in Finnish)
    • Per WP:BLP#Privacy of names, unless the names of his children adds anything to the article (which it does not), we can just state that he has three children and their ages.(EhJJ)TALK
  • Scientific publications by Halla-aho.

My main viewpoints are that:

  • These are notable and neutral facts published by reliable sources and not fan material in any way.
  • Helsingin Sanomat is the biggest newspaper in Finland and it's question of the day is surely notable.
    • Yes, but it is a completely useless poll as it just represents those people who accessed that newspapers website on that day and who decided to complete the poll. It has no validity, so should only be included if there is a reason that a reader of the article would care to know the results. (EhJJ)TALK
  • Google Inc., Helsingin Sanomat, Pohjalainen and Uusi Suomi are neutral sources and Helsingin Sanomat, Pohjalainen and Uusi Suomi respected newspapers in Finland.
  • The first fact has also been presented in Wikipedia's front page on 2 January 2009. See: User talk:Mifter#DYK for Jussi Halla-aho.
    • While it may have been nominated, that fact is not listed in WP:DYK's archive and probably never appeared on the front page. (EhJJ)TALK
  • Halla-aho has told that his children and family are the main reason why he takes part in social debate[25] and there are four sources for his childrens names[26][27][28][29] and Halla-aho's children have also been mentioned in other articles[30](City)[31](Helsingin Sanomat). His children have also appeared in his columns[32][33][34][35][36][37]. Because of these facts there is no point protecting Halla-aho's children when they and their names are mentioned in various sources as well as Halla-aho himself has repeatedly introduced them in various contexts.
    • Still, I believe WP:BLP#Privacy of names makes it clear that Wikipedia frowns on the use of private information about living people when it serves no purpose. That he has children and their ages IS appropriate. (EhJJ)TALK
  • Halla-aho works as a full time scientist as told in the article and writing his biography without mentioning his scientific work is not possible. Only Halla-aho's most notable publications are mentioned here: Halla-ahos dissertation, article in Journal of Indo-European Studies, article in Indogermanische Forschungen, Old Church Slavic Manual that is used in University of Helsinki to teach Old Church Slavic, Papers in Slavic, Baltic and Balkan studies that is used as a source in various Wikipedia articles too. Also there are articles linked to this article because of Halla-aho's studies used as sources there. See: Aromanians, Aromanian language and Vallahades.
  • See also: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored, reliable source and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

My opinion is that if we censor these notable and neutral facts from the article it is not possible to write Mr. Halla-aho's biography and we have neutrality problem in this article. Klassikkomies (talk) 01:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Viewpoint by User:Thi
  • It seems to me that Scripta should be written as Scripta.
    • Titles are written in italics and not bold. (EhJJ)TALK
  • According to Halla-aho, criticizing totalitarian fascist ideologies like political Islam is not racism and the facts can not be criminalized. I think that this should be criticizing "totalitarian fascist ideologies" like political Islam'' as in fi-wiki (it is a citation).
  • I think that He has received death threats because of his web columns should be Halla-aho says that he has received death threats because of his web columns, because it is from one interview.
  • I see this potentially as non-neutral: and in December 2008, Finnish police began investigation on Halla-aho for incitement against an ethnic group because of his texts. These should be a separate sentences, because Finnish police doesn't haunt the person in question. In December 2008, Finnish police began investigation on Halla-aho for incitement against an ethnic group because of his texts.
    • If you think separating it into two lines makes it more neutral, then that's fine. (EhJJ)TALK
  • Halla-aho has denied that he is an anti-foreigner. He maintains that he is simply “critical of immigration”. This should be in other paragraph. It is about Halla-aho's political opinions.
  • He has received positive feedback also from the immigrants and they buy T-shirts that support him. – This is potentially a non-neutral sentence.
    • Definitely. How many immigrants bought t-shirts from him... 2? Even if it was 50 or 500, what does that mean? This is implying some sort of endorsement and is non-neutral/original research. (EhJJ)TALK
  • In his dissertation, Halla-aho offers a diachronic solution for a number of difficult inflectional endings in Old Church Slavic nominal declensions. People don't need to know every detail of some persons work careeer. Halla-aho is notable as politician, not as a post-graduate student. Doctoral thesis is just a thesis.
  • In addition to his dissertation – this is just highlighting. The word "also" can be used instead.
  • Halla-aho has published articles in scientific journals – Actually Halla-aho has published two such articles. has been an editor selection of papers by slavists, baltologists and balkanists from Austria, Croatia, Canada, Finland, Latvia, Poland, Russia and the United States of America is also highlighting. He has been one of the editors in selection of papers by slavists, baltologists and balkanists from different countries or He has been one of the editors in selection of papers by linguists from different countries is more appropriate.
  • About the "question of the day" of Helsingin sanomat. It is very problematic to say that the internet poll is representative. specially Halla-aho's supporters are active in discussion pages of Helsingin sanomat. For example, usually men are active in internet discussion, but Halla-aho was in the news because he has said (ironically, according to him), that some women should be raped. From Finnish Wikipedia: "Vihreät Naiset ilmoittivat 18.11.2008 jättävänsä Halla-ahosta tutkintapyynnön[27][28][29] Scripta-blogissa vuoden 2006 joulukuussa julkaistusta kirjoituksesta Monikulttuurisuus ja nainen.[30] Vihreiden Naisten puheenjohtaja Heli Järvisen mukaan ”kyse ei ole sananvapauden harjoittamisesta tai viattomasta monikulttuurisuuskritiikistä, vaan raiskauksiin ja vihaan lietsomisesta”. Halla-aho kiistää tämän, ja kertoo vastustavansa naisiin kohdistuvaa väkivaltaa.[31]" Klassikkomies has not been translated this to English Wikipedia.
    • See my comments above. Very much not representative and should only be included if the poll has some significance. (EhJJ)TALK
  • Halla-aho has said that his children and family are the main reason why he takes part in social debate. Klassikkomies has selected this from TV interview. I see it potentially non-neutral (all people do things because of their children. and his wife and children have also appeared in his columns. As a reference, Klassikkomies offers his selection of columns from Halla-aho's blog. This is near original research. Usually people write about their families in blogs.
  • Halla-aho's hobbies include reading J. R. R. Tolkien, astronomy as well as pistol and rifle shooting. Some people see this as a trivia, so it is not in Finnish Wikipedia.
    • This does seem like trivia, unless it is in some way significant. (EhJJ)TALK
I do not want to participate to discussion in any more, because there is already much talk in this page. You can do your own conclusions. Thanks for EhJJ and others. --Thi (talk) 11:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Third opinion by EhJJ
....

Sorry for taking so long to reply. Unfortunately, the discussion here was much more in depth than a typical dispute brought to WP:3O and I haven't had time to dedicate to replying to everything at once. For clarity, I have added my comments in-line above with a short signature. I have tried my best to be neutral and find Wikipedia policies and guidelines to support my opinions. Please feel free to continue the discussion about points of mine with which you disagree in a new section below. (EhJJ)TALK 02:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Protection?

[edit]

The article should probably be protected due to on going vandalism, the fact that the person in question is a controversial figure in Finnish politics and as it's the biography of a living person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jk2exp (talk • contribs) 21:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: requests for changes to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Anomie⚔ 02:09, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

[edit]

The article talks about Halla-Asho's "immigration critisism" and quots himself stating, that he is not racist. On the other hand there is no mention about him being a member of the nationalist (self ddescription) organization Suomen Sisu, which has a position against miscegenation. http://www.iltalehti.fi/uutiset/2013031216769507_uu.shtml If you don't dare to use the word "racist", please at least concider not leaving out all the relevant information showing that he is making racist politics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.204.37.227 (talk) 12:49, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Would you clarify: Do you suggest that if a politician is a member of Suomen Sisu, then he is making racist politics? --Uikku (talk) 11:27, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
First off, Halla-aho's membership in Suomen Sisu is mentioned in the article. Second, Suomen Sisu is not a racist organisation. Wikipedia is not a platform to push for your own political opinions or original research. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 12:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

POV-template

[edit]

I can see that this issue has been raised in other forms earlier. I've marked out one of the sections as a POV-section for its use of sources, which is glaringly biased. Tundra tabloids and Gates of Vienna for facts? Come on. benjamil talk/edits 22:25, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources were probably chosen in the first place, because they were among the few English language sources that deal with the case in depth. There are Finnish language sources that have the same information. I don't see a reason to keep the template now that the sources, that you objected to, are gone. --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 00:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The template should stay until the section has been rewritten in accordance with reliable sources. If it was based entirely on POV-sources in the first place, the risk that the POV has been carried on into WP should be evident. benjamil talk/edits 07:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that those sources are not RS and it's good that they were removed. But it seems the POV problems are actually partly because of your recent edits to the article (compared to July 1).
Take this sentence for example: "In the course of the investigation, he claimed that this was intended as a sarcastic response to a Finnish columnist of the newspaper Kaleva, who had written that drinking excessively and fighting when drunk were cultural and possibly genetic characteristics of Finns."
This is simply wrongly formulated, he didn't "claim that during the investigation" but his text was response to the Kaleva article and the resulting complaint to the state prosecutor Illman (thus Halla-aho's text title was "A few baits to Mika Illman") and used the same word forms like the newspaper Kaleva used ("alcohol and violence is a genetic trait of the Finns"). Kaleva itself removed the article from their webpage, and this Wikipedia article uses a description of the events by a Kaleva journalist after the trial which states exactly that. In any case, the current sources in that section are still poor. I think it would be best to cut such partisan claims and over-interpretations and stick to short description of the events. Also, I can't find a mention in the Helsinki Times article that would indicate that... "The investigation originally aimed to determine whether it constituted incitement to suggest that an assault rapist should target female supporters of multiculturalism,". That is a separate issue, it was about remarks of rape and Green Party Women. The Green Party Women decided to ask the police to start an investigation on it source:Ilta-Sanomat in November 2008 but nothing came of it and the actual investigation was started in December 2008 based on other texts. --Pudeo' 15:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. I'm sorry that it's taken me some time to respond to this. Having had to begin with text which in some parts used solely Hanna-Ahos personal blog or Tundra Tabloids as their source, I'd prefer it if my contributions from July 8 were referred to as a tremendous improvement in the direction of NPOV, but I'll refrain from pressing the issue, as it is mostly one of vanity. Nonetheless, I agree that the phrase "In the course of the investigation, he claimed..." is not entirely accurate. My main problem with this piece of text, which remains an issue in the present version, is that Wikipedia's voice is used to explain the intentions behind the text. Intentions, however, are ridiculuosly hard to prove, and I attempted to put the phrase about the intention into Hanna-Aho's voice.
With regards to the secound point, "The investigation originally aimed to determine whether it constituted..." I only rephrased that piece of text, as you can see from the history. I'm sure this point will ease your criticism over my sloppiness in not double-checking the sourcing of this text during my copyedit. As far as I can understand the conjecture stems from this article on yle.fi, where the charges that were brought to court are mentioned together with the charges filed by The Green Party's Women's Board. I disagree with Pudeo's edit which removes the description of the latter charges and the reference to the precise statement on which they were based. They are well documented and are closely connected to the main case with regards to both time and theme. benjamil talk/edits 19:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the Green Women's case was related. Reasons: they filed a complaint to the police and thus in a potential trial the Green Women's would probably be a part of the trial as plaintiff. It's unlikely that they would just completely change the texts they're investigating in the same case. The actual case that led to Halla-aho's conviction was initiated by the General Prosecutor. However, given the short time scale it could be that the publicity by the Green Women investigation led to the General Prosecutor or police hasten up on the other blog text. It could stay in the article as another controversy but I can't interpret it as a part of the conviction. --Pudeo' 18:19, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comments

[edit]

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:27, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal charges and conviction

[edit]

It seems the section is well supported by sources, but. If a fine of 400 Euro is enough to have a lenghty section in an article about a person, then I assume we may develop some interesting articles over the coming years. I suggest that the whole affair is boiled down to a sentence, if anything at all. Ulflarsen (talk) 18:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jussi Halla-aho. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:28, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Jussi Halla-aho. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:58, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jussi_Halla-aho&oldid=1257744706"