Talk:Fredrik Reinfeldt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Politics and Government (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
 
WikiProject Sweden (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Politics (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Good article Fredrik Reinfeldt 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.



Edits removed[edit]

Slarre, why did you take away the new pictures. They were certainly not purposefully ugly, like the diabolic picture for example. I am restoring...

Because your images are not free and thus cannot be used on Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Image use policy. /Slarre 23:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Youngest Prime Minister?[edit]

"At the age of 41, Reinfeldt is the youngest person to become Prime Minister."

Not according to -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_Sweden

Correct, Mr X. Third youngest, as you wrote. The younger ones being Rickard Sandler and Robert Themptander, aka Dick'n'bob (no, not really - just couldn't resist). Said: Rursus 19:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Birthplace?[edit]

"Reinfeldt was born in Täby."

His place of birth seems somewhat disputed. According to the Swedish wikipage, he was born in Österhaninge and grew up in Tensta. Cyrruss 11:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I have addressed the issue, hopefully from a reliable source. --Oden 01:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Infobox[edit]

Fredrik Reinfeldt
File:Fredrik Reinfeldt 2003-10-27.jpg
Member of Parliament
Incumbent
Assumed office
October 1991
Constituency Stockholm Municipality[1]
Chairman of the Moderate Party
Incumbent
Assumed office
October 25, 2003
Preceded by Bo Lundgren
Prime Minister of Sweden
Incumbent
Assumed office
October 5, 2006
Preceded by Göran Persson
Personal details
Born August 4, 1965
Österhaninge, Stockholm
Political party Moderate Party
Spouse(s) Filippa Reinfeldt
Children Gustaf (1993), Erik (1995) and Ebba (1999) [2]
Residence Täby, Sweden
Occupation MP, Chairman, Prime Minister
Website www.moderat.se

Policies as Prime Minister in Intro[edit]

The introduction should contain a short summary of Reinfeldt's policies as Prime Minister. What are some things that he has done or initiated. Something more than just the "centre-right" label. Patiwat 20:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Österhaninge or Stockholm - cos it can't be both[edit]

Where was he born? The intro says Österhaninge, but the biography bit says "Fredrik Reinfeldt was born at Allmänna BB in Stockholm as the oldest of three brothers to his parents". Neither is sourced. --Mais oui! 00:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

"Allmänna BB" is just the name of the hospital in Stockholm where he was born. The registered birthplace by Swedish authorities is usually the place where the parents are registered, thus Reinfeldt's registered birthplace is Österhaninge. /Slarre 02:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Attending a Bilderberg Group meeting - a "controversy"?[edit]

The Controversies text states that:

Fredrik Reinfeldt attended a meeting held by the Bilderberg Group in Ottawa, Canada in June of 2006, a meeting which was also attended by former Moderate Party leader and Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt.

Either it should be explained why this is 'controversial' or it should be taken out. I vote for the latter.KarlXII 13:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

While membership in the Bilderberg Group itself may be regarded as controversial by some (in particular for members of the House of Commons it seems), it cannot reasonably be so in this article (at least given the sources I have reviewed to date). However, this information most likely does meet the requirement for notability, importance, or significance (if one is to draw inspiration from there) and should remain in the article. For lack of a better heading I have place the sentence under 'public perception' for now. --Oden 08:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't contest that it could be mentioned somewhere. However, I didn't feel that it mrerited to be included in the list of the major controversies regarding Reinfeldt. For example, Googling "Reinfeldt" and "Bilderberg" gives 812 hits while googling his name and "nanny" gives 14,600 hits and "au-pair" 18,000 hits. My 2 cents.KarlXII 12:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Noted. --Oden 12:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

GA review -- first look & comments[edit]

hello,

Things are looking pretty good here. The article seems well-cited and well-written.

There are some stretches that seem to lack significance, as for example:

At the age of eleven Reinfeldt became chairperson of the student council (Swedish: elevrådet) in his school, and at this time in his life Reinfeldt became a fan of Djurgården IF in Ice hockey and Football which he still is today. Reinfeldt enjoyed listening to the music of Magnus Uggla and David Bowie. He started playing basketball for the Tensta Tigers while living in Bromsten (which is located adjacent to Tensta), and he continued playing for the 'Tensta Tigers' after his family moved to Täby. Fredrik Reinfeldt has said that in sports it does not matter how you look or what your name is, what matters is how good you are and how well you work in a team. Reinfeldt also enjoyed setting up and performing revues and cabarets.

...and:

Regarding his family life, Reinfeldt has stated that he likes washing up in the kitchen, "I like when things are clean"[6], and cultivated the image of a good family man who enjoys housework[7]. He enjoys reading crime novels and history books and listening to Swedish 1970s disco group ABBA[32]. Reinfeldt is a fan of Djurgårdens IF. So is Left Party leader Lars Ohly. When Reinfeldt was asked if there was something he liked about Ohly, he said: "Yes, he supports Djurgården".

This kind of "he's a great guy" passage really make people wonder if the article has NPOV problems. Moreover, I don't know if they bear greatly upon his role in Swedish history. A little fluff is OK, but there are long passages of it.

There are a few copyedit problems, mostly very minor. I noticed repeated use of "Reinfeldts" instead of "Reinfeldt's" as the possessive form.

The quotations in boxes are a bit distracting, and moreover they don't seem to be really major policy statements. They seem a bit like party platform talking points. I might consider deleting them, unless you can replace them with some of his more important quotes.

His political philosophy seems to be scattered throughout the article, though it is a bit more focused in the "new Moderates" section. Perhaps a separate section on this would be a good thing. Perhaps it could depict more clearly his differences with the Social Democrats... or with whatever group could be considered his ideological opposites.

In all, a good effort. I'm not gonna pass the article or put it on hold, because a hold can only last 7 days. I think this article may need a few days of rearranging and rewriting, especially to sharpen the focus on his more notable beliefs and accomplishments.

Thanks, --Ling.Nut 01:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Fixed the mentioned spelling errors (Reinfeldts -> Reinfeldt's).
  • Moved quotes to Wikiquote.
  • Removed some of the fluff/POV statements, however some fluff is inevitable. (After all Gerald Ford was a Eagle Scout and Tony Blair attempted to find fame as a rock music promoter.)
  • Regarding Reinfeldt's political philosophy, beliefs and notability he has been prime minister since October 16, 2006 so it is still a little early to be definitive, but it probably needs to be mentioned in a more concise manner in the article (the "Political career" section would need a rewrite though).
--Oden 00:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Good Article Nomination -- On Hold[edit]

I'm putting this Good Article nomination On Hold for 7 days, as per guidelines 3b and possibly 4 of WP:WIAGA.--Ling.Nut 21:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

GA nomination comment: Social or economic tides?[edit]

I have a question. Were they any discernible social or economic tides which led directly to Reinfeldt's election? Any controversies? Any public debates? I know his office is not Foreign Minister, but did any international events at all play a part in the decision? (Esp. since foreign policy impacts domestic policy, particularly economic policy).

Fifty year from now, how will people complete the statement: "Reinfeldt was elected because of x? [And please don't say "because he's a nice guy :-) ].

What was everyone in Sweden talking about at the water cooler during the election?

Thank you --Ling.Nut 00:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The strongest idea seems to be that the previous government failed to bring down unemployment even though the economy was booming, and failed to campaign on it as a issue. " 'The Moderates were right strategically to focus on unemployment,' said Ardalan Shekarabi, the 27-year-old former chairman of the young Social Democrats."[1] Promises of tax cuts by the Moderate, the notion among pundits that the prime minister and leading party had become complacent after ten years in power and scandals in the previous administration as well as the revival of the "new Moderates" and other factors might also have influenced the outcome, it was a fairly close election. --Oden 01:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • That's good stuff!! Find references to back up your ideas, and put them in the article!
  • ALSO please carefully check the sentence reordering I did in the New Moderates section. It is very important that my edits not add any new ideas or new content. --Ling.Nut 02:00, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Started on a new section "2006 Swedish general election". There is more election analysis at Swedish general election, 2006 (which is the main article on the subject).
  • Your edit in "the new Moderates" section improved the language and style without introducing any new information. --Oden 08:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
No, it was because the other guy was un-nice... To be serious: the Swedes hade made economical sacrifices since about 1990 or so, and had to stand hard deteriorations of the welfare system, under bourgeoisi and under socialist regimes, the later ones all the time declaring that the welfare system should be restored when the economy was restored. Now the economy started to improve markedly, and the social democrat government made nothing to restore the welfare system, declaring everything to be perfect and no improvements needed to be done. So the voters voted for the other guy, that declared that he (F.R.) was much better than the previous guy. Everything was perfect after the downcast of the other guy (Göran Persson), until the first week of Fredrik Reinfeldts regime... Said: Rursus 17:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Eeeh, forgot: in the bigger picture, the economical analyses and the general competence of both political sides have deteriorated markedly under some 20-30 years, much less competent politicians being elected, much more "cultic" organizations with harder internal opinion control. The voters' faith for the established politicians deteriorating markedly, making obscure and more destructive political forces getting a considerable support, such as the Sweden-democrats, the Pirate Party and other weird stuff. Said: Rursus 17:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

GA review: two small comments[edit]

Two phrases look a bit awkward:

  1. "Reinfeldt participated in convincing every conscript in the..." sounds as if he personally spoke to every conscript in the Swedish military. Did he participate in a "program intended to convince.."? If he participated, was he a major player, or just a minor figure? If he was a minor figure, then there's no need to say that explicitly. It is implied in the fact that he is not described as a major figure. If he was a major figure in this effort, then the article should say so.
  2. "Reinfeldt traveled around the country, listening to people, taking impression and...". I don't think "taking impression" is felicitous. People usually say "gathering impressions," and moreover we usually include information about what he was gathering impressions of: "Reinfeldt traveled around the country, listening to people, gathering impressions of public opinion, and...". This in turn creates a bit of awkward phrasing, since the next phrase is "gathering support." If you use "gathering impressions" then you should use some synonym for "gathering" with the word "support," so the word "gathering" won't be used twice in the same sentence. It isn't ungrammatical; it just sounds a bit repetitive.

Good work! --Ling.Nut 14:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

  1. I do not how great his involvement was, and a web search didn't yield any more information, so it might be possible to remove the sentence altogether for lack of a better source. I changed it to say: "Reinfeldt participated in a movement where every conscript in the Swedish armed forces donated one day's pay to the starving in Africa".
  2. Changed to "During this time Reinfeldt traveled around the country gathering impressions and support at the local level of the Moderate Party".
--Oden 21:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
...one penny No sources = suggest delete.
...gathering Sounds good!
--Ling.Nut 23:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Fixed! --Oden 07:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

"Good Article" passed[edit]

This article meets the standards for "Good Article," as a well-written and well-referenced article about an important political figure on the world stage.

There are still one or two facts that need referencing, but that is a very minor detail.

I enjoyed working with you. Congratulations! --Ling.Nut 08:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your help in improving the article! --Oden 09:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Religion[edit]

Well, first of all I find it strange that his religious conviction is so prominently displayed. It feels like ethnocentricity in the works. But then again, I don't really know how important a politician's religious views are around the world and it's not really what I wanted to discuss.

The infobox currently says that Reinfeldt is "Agnostic/non-religious", but I think that that's misleading. A quick and dirty translation of the relevant part of the source:

Q: Do you believe in God?
A: I'm not an active believer. I'm more of a seeker, like many in our country. I'm humbled before the great questions about the origins of life and its meaning. It's hard to believe that everything exists without a greater thought behind it.

I agree with the agnostic part, but not really the non-religious. I checked the linked page (Irreligion) and it says that it can be understood as referring to a number of things that doesn't really fit well with the statement above. That and agnosticism. So I'd say that it's either not supported by the source or tautological and needlessly broad. Anyway, I found it confusing. I'll change it if nobody replies to this in a week or so. /Djonn 23:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

That sounds more like a Deist to me. --The monkeyhate 16:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
As religion doesn't matter much in Swedish politics (compared to American politics, which that infobox probably was made for), I think it would be better to just remove the religion part. --82.183.224.40 (talk) 14:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I have now removed the religious affiliation from the infobox. /Slarre (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I think that the religion-part in the infobox should be put up again. I am aware of the fact that religion isn't such a big deal in Sweden, but this article is accsessed worldwide and other people may find it of interest.81.231.120.70 (talk) 03:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Since the article is in English it usually means people from countries other than Sweden are reading it; and may find it, as above said, of interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.52.135 (talk) 00:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Genealogy[edit]

This section looks completely strange. I moved it and tried to give it a little context,[2] but I'm afraid I don't know the details well enough to do better. For one thing, "Mulato" is generally considered offensive in English, at least in the U.S. If the race is mentioned, it needs to be done more appropriately, but I'm not sure that's even possible. In any case, I removed the word "mulato," in which case it may be fine where it is. I'd also remove the sentence about Italian ancestry. The whole thing just sounds very strange to American ears. Do others agree?Mackan79 13:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

He's 1/32 negro and apparently the father of his negro relative was a cannibal, that makes him 1/64 cannibal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.236.128.225 (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

There was no cannibal. According to the tabloid source[3], the "circus director"-great-great-grandfather performed as a "cannibal" as some kind of circus number or similarly. --83.253.249.221 (talk) 23:22, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Picture[edit]

Devilish? I actually liked the previous one [4]. Doesn't the new one look kind of solemn? [5] Mackan79 13:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. The old one is much better --Winterus 13:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
While it seems I'm in a minority position, I do not agree. The current picture has a white background which enhances the impression of the article. It is also three years newer than the former picture. Lastly, the current picture has something of an "official" status when compared to the one from norden.org, as it is used as the official riksdag photo (see [6]). (The "devilish" part was not very serious, it's because of some propaganda I saw where his eyes had been turned red and the corner teeth made more visible.) Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 13:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I guess it's a matter of taste, but I just don't see it. The new one looks very amateurish to me (official or not). Maybe the doctored version is coloring your perception? If it's alright, I'll replace the other one on 2-1, but maybe others will offer opinions. Mackan79 13:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, revert it. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 14:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to use this one, a shame we can't. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 14:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
That's the biggest picture I've ever seen. It must be copyrighted? Would be good otherwise.Mackan79 14:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Yep, it's copyrighted. Or, it may be used freely... but only until 2010. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 16:59, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Jobjörn, but the Riksdag picture is older than the current one (norden.org), isn't it? The norden.org pic is dated 2003-10-27 while the Riksdag picture is found on the Riksdag website archived in December 2002. I must say that I also prefer the norden.org pic which IMO looks more professional. /Slarre 15:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey, that's true. My apologies then - I (apparently mistakenly) assumed that all members of the riksdag took new photos at the beginning of the new term, because I've noticed some have (while creating articles on the members of the riksdag). Well, then I have no arguments left for the riksdag picture, so... Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 16:59, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Devilish? Oh, he looks like he looks. Blame mother nature – not him! Said: Rursus 18:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
This is the ugliest picture of him I've ever seen. Take back the old picture! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.179.94 (talk) 12:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I found a nicer picture and used it to replace the old one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ystad (talkcontribs) 11:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The current photo shows the man in a beige suit sitting down. He looks unkept. He doesn't look like a PM but rather an poet in a coffee shop. Consider changing to a more official looking press photo. User F203 (talk) 15:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Not NPOV: Public perception[edit]

Ähummm!! The section Public perception seems to imply that FR is very admired and have gotten a very positive image. The truth is rather that the reception have been rather bland: the Alliance's opinions are climbing down, ... and down ..., and down ... The content in Public perception seems to be written by a moderat – it would be better if both negative and positive receptions of him be collected. Something about the extremely hard criticism against his choice of ministers, which forced two of them to resign before entering office, and put two other under heavy pressure. This was the first time in Swedish history, that such heavy criticism occured for a new government within the month after winning the election! After half a year, there was a heavy criticism and lack of confidence from within the supporters of the Alliance itself... Said: Rursus 18:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Disregarding your own apparent bias in this matter, I do not see how the matter of the Bilderberg group and Reinfeldt's parents are even part of his public perception (as is strongly implied by the section heading). The SIFO study quoted may be of interest to the reader, but there should probably be additional information referencing reliable sources on the perception in 2007 as it may have changed over time. If you can provide such sourced material, it should certainly be considered if written in an unbiased tone. Sarnalios 16:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree. The Bilderberg group and his parents are hardly part of his public image. I don't think it is being discussed very much in public. Rursus, you should find sources for your claims. Sources that are better than ‘some people sais’. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ystad (talkcontribs) 17:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Swedes are you? (Trying to stomp out any fits of temper, in a phobic fear of anger and "loss of control") See Lundgren below - I would like some non-Swede take a look at the bad formulations about "fits of rage". Said: Rursus 08:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
BTW, I'm a native Swede myself - I know the "Swedish character", no anti-Swedish aggression intended, just an improvement of the bad sides. Said: Rursus 08:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Again![edit]

I added the text in red, in order to make the section Public perception make NPOV sense:

Reinfeldt has been called a "Swedish [[David Cameron]]", insofar as he succeeded to shift the moderates from a right position to a center position in politics. On the other hand he is thought to have influenced Cameron, since the Swedish prime minister was elected party leader in 2003 -- two years before Cameron took control of the British [[Conservative Party]] in 2005.

Otherwise the section sounds like: he is a kind man like John Doe farmer from Kentucky! Now: why is the following meaningful? Are the Clintons good or bad? Does the text refer to the Lewinsky story? Or is Filippa R. going to be president of USA?

He has also been likened to former President Bill Clinton, while his wife has been likened to the former First Lady, Senator Hillary Clinton.[3] Fredrik Reinfeldt has been described as a communitarian<ref>[http://www.svd.se/dynamiskt/kultur/did_12272094.asp Framgångsteologi för massorna] {{sv icon}}, Svenska Dagbladet, [[April 2]] [[2006]].

An important remark to make in this context is that "framgångsteologi" (in the reference = Prosperity theology) in Sweden have a generally bad connotation, see Ulf Ekman and Livets Ord for the controversies around alleged mobbing of disabled persons, and cult syndrom among some of the adherents of Livets Ord in the 1980:ies and 1990:ies. How do we deal with that? Said: Rursus 09:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Image[edit]

Who remoed the image as well as the images of all other swedish politicians? --Dahlis 00:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fredrik Reinfeldt and Angela Merkel (Mars 2007).jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Fredrik Reinfeldt and Angela Merkel (Mars 2007).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Lundgren "fits of rage" (doubtful)[edit]

The article says:

Bo Lundgren, who on several occasions displayed fits of rage.[2]

seems to me to be a great exaggeration of the Swedish fear-for-emotion kind, the original text says:

Bo Lundgren fick ju ofta koleriska utbrott

which literally is translated to:

Bo Lundgren often got choleric outbreaks,

which is much more like small fits of anger (survival of the "fittest", no forget it, just kidding). Except that "fits" indicates loss of control, while "koleriska utbrott" more refers to "expressed his anger suddenly, clearly and with emphasis". The deal with this Swedes-loss-of-control-phobia stuff, is that Swedes (except myself of course!) tend to greatly exaggerate the degree of emotion expressed, declaring an expression of anger being a "psychotic outfit of mass destruction and genocide", just for the terror evoked.

A Danish or Finnish, who are better suited to this, please rectify this stuff! Said: Rursus 08:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

President of the European Union?[edit]

Thats a bit misleading, no? I think this should be discussed before it's changed though.NoWay555 (talk) 04:50, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Image in Foreign policy section[edit]

right|thumb I have commented out the image shown on the right here, which appears in the Foreign policy section with the caption "Reinfeldt with former U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House, watching what time it was". Can the picture be explained, or is it just the vandalism that it appears to be? --Malleus Fatuorum 19:17, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Fredrik Reinfeldt/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

As part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles' Project quality task force, all old good articles are being re-reviewed to ensure that they meet current good article criteria (as detailed at WP:WIAGA.) This article has a few issues that need to be addressed before I can pass the article as swept:

  • Overall the article is well written, clear, and well-sourced. It's one of the few articles I've reviewed that hasn't degraded significantly over the years after being passed, so kudos to the authors. I've done some minor reworking to the lead, moving some facts about so that the details about his personal life are a less jarring transition.
  • One of the issues I've found is that the article is geared towards someone who understands Swedish politics. Giving you a hint here: I don't understand it, and I'm sure 90% of readers don't. Therefor, some extra description would be great. For example, the lead gives election results in 2002 as "disastrous", which seems like unncessary hyperbole (not least because 'disastrous' is POV.) Later in the article body it says "Following the loss in the Swedish general election of 2002, Lundgren was forced to resign his position as leader of the Moderate Party." But we don't know anything about what happened in the general election. Tell us more! Details are cheap and should be easy to add and source!
  • The later sections are light on content; there are lots of one or two-line paragraphs which actually aren't real paragraphs (at minimum, three sentences are required.) These need to be cut, merged, or (considering the length of the article) expanded.
  • Now, with eyes to the fact that this is a BLP: why is there a section marked "Smear campaigns against Reinfeldt"? Surely those details can be merged into the relevant election section above? I feel like this information could be better summarized and moved into the above election section; the details can go to the election subpage. I also removed a "controversy" section, mostly because those kinds of sections are POV warrior magnets and most of it was trivial or entirely unsourced.
  • "Public perception" needs updating; it's more than a year out of date.

I'm giving a week (longer if improvements are being made) for the above issues to be addressed. Please appraise me of progress here in this space. Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:00, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

  • I'll try to address your concerns in the upcoming days. Theleftorium 18:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
    • I have addressed a few of your concerns now and will work on the rest soon. I'd appreciate some more comments though (especially on the parts that are hard to understand), if you have time to write them down. :) Theleftorium 00:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
      • What parts do you find confusing? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:52, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
        • Sorry, I should have been more clear. I meant I'd like to get some more examples of parts of the article you find confusing. Theleftorium 15:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
    • Ah, right then. Parts that don't make much sense to the non-initiated:
      • "Reinfeldt joined the Moderate Youth League"... who are? We really shouldn't force readers to click away to internal links just to find out what something is unless it's absolutely necessary; it interrupts reading and flow. Same thing with "was elected a member of the Riksdag".
      • "He ousted the former chairman, Ulf Kristersson at the controversial congress known as The Battle of Lycksele, gathering 58 of the delegates votes with Kristersson gathering 55 votes." What made this congress controversial? That it caused some divisions is made clear, but the reasons are not explained.
      • "The Moderate Party has a strong pro-European Union policy stance—including support for exchanging the Swedish krona for the euro—and also supports Sweden joining NATO. Reinfeldt has also opposed a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, saying that the democratically elected Iraqi government should have the last say on the issue." is entirely unsourced

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 21:47, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

  • Thanks. I'll work on these sometime this week. Theleftorium 15:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
    • Just letting you know that I currently have a high fever and that's why I haven't had time to work on the article. I'll try to address your concerns tomorrow or early next week. Theleftorium 17:12, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
      • In regards to the message you left on my talk page—if it's unsourced, burn with fire! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 21:58, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
        • Done! :) I think I've gotten everything, but I'll read through the article later today just to be sure. Theleftorium 15:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
David -- I actually have one general question in regards to your first statement, that articles degrade over the years. I agree they do, but doesn't the GA template say "This article or an earlier version is considered GA"? And isn't there (in best case) a link to that earlier version of the article? Why, then, must articles be removed from GA when an earlier version is indeed a full worthy GA? In worst case, just revert the article to that earlier GA version; or otherwise make a review of the article as it once was.
I think it is bad practice and against the spirit of Wikipedia if one must act like a hawk over ones GA and FA articles and remove every edit that is not 100% up to standard and referenced and NPOV, including most edit from IP addresses.
Fred-J 13:26, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Except there's no guarantee that the GA version meets criteria; remember, A) the articles being swept are from 2007 and earlier, and standards have risen since then, and B) who's to say the article wasn't poorly reviewed in the first place? In the GA version of this article, for example, the reviewer apparently didn't notice a {{cn}} tag—that's grounds for a quickfail, for instance. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:52, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
  • The above issues I've pointed out have been fixed, and I don't see anything else leaping out, so I will pass. Cheers, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:02, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Agnosticism[edit]

Googling reveals nothing about Reinfeldt's supposed agnosticism except wikipedia mirrors? What is the basis for this? Even more, what is the basis for claiming he is not a member of the Church of Sweden - my understanding was that virtually all Swedes are a) not actually religious; but also b) members of the Church of Sweden. What is the evidence that Reinfeldt is not? john k (talk) 16:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Religion doesent matter much in Sweden and has very little relevance, and is usually not something you ask or discuss with anyone, even the politicians.

New image?[edit]

Can we use the official photo on this site? Or is Wikipedia considered a commercial website? --Reckless182 (talk) 16:47, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Needs an overhaul[edit]

The latter half of the article is low on real content, it also needs to be updated, and to a non-Swede it would give a very generic picture of Reinfeldt and his policies. In that sense, the criticism from two years ago still stands up. I can see that part of the reason for this is that Reinfeldt himself isn't eager to make strong and sharp-edged statements about the political directions he is aiming for. What he says from the tribune sort of tends to boil down to "It's the economy, stupid" - beyond economic and voters-wallets reasoning, which is made to sound "scientific" and not geared to any particular political points of view beyond everyman thinking, he rarely makes any broader statements. Nor do such statements proliferate in the press in a way that would constitute definite attempts at explaining government policies.

Sweden is plainly living through a very apolitical time - the urban middle classes mostly don't want anything to do with politics, while people in the countryside or in squeezed positions (out of work, students and so on) don't have the time or security to engage in it - and with the WP model for sourcing statements from the public media, this state of affairs makes it hard to describe even rather obvious things about these political movements, e.g. that the rebranding of the Moderate party had a strong component of triangulation, of trying to pick up socialist and liberal watchwords and harness them to a conservative agenda. Some journalists, political analysts and columnists in Sweden have pointed out that aspect, but they don't really use the term triangulation, though they describe the same phenomenon. So if one put in a few lines about it here, using them as sources it would probably get removed by some Swedish conservative (there are many of them on sv-wp and some of them migrate here) who doesn't want to hear of FR and the "new Moderates" being described that way.Strausszek (talk) 19:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

File:FredrikReinfeldt.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:FredrikReinfeldt.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ Här är dina 349 folkvalda(PDF-file) (Swedish), Dagens Nyheter
  2. ^ En Reinfeldt i ropet (Swedish), Svenska Dagbladet, October 1, 2006.
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference BBC was invoked but never defined (see the help page).