Talk:Julian Fantino

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography (Rated B-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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Law Enforcement (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Law Enforcement WikiProject. Please Join, Create, and Assess.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
WikiProject Canada / Ontario / Toronto / Politicians (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada.

Policing Controversies[edit]

When was the section on policing controvercies removed ? Dowew 19:33, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Any partisan reason for removing the reference to Fantino's neglect to investigate complaints, as submitted My 12, 2006?

The most egregious example of Fantino's duplicity

The edit was transparently POV. If you can think of a neutral way of submitting the same information, we might be willing to consider it. CJCurrie 01:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing POV about it; it really happened, as described within the link provided, never mind the taped threats as left on Turner's phone (and rejected by Fantino as, "Standard operating procedure"); four publicly named "appointees" to "investigate", but in fact, kill this issue; the eight hour video taped statement provided over two days, July, 2000, then buried, also, ad nauseum. It's just too bad none of these materials can be posted. Bear in mind Jim Cassell's recent revelations and all I can say is, "It's about time". (, for one, for another.)

Too many have suffered as a result of Fantino's inaction and outright arrogance. I wouldn't wish what Turner, his now long-gone friends and family have been put through on anyone.

I'm going to re-insert the material again and ask you to reconsider. Let the facts speak for themselves and the public be even more enlightened, if you would. After all, this information has been disseminated elsewhere (including a feature in The Toronto Star, May 10, 2004) for years and nobody's been sued, if that's your concern.

I think you should read Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:NPOV before proceeding further. CJCurrie 23:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Well sir, it's obvious that you've appointed yourself the moral guardian of all things political and are quite proud of that. Insofar as "verifiable", see my reference to The Star article, read the link provided, talk to the media present at his precious "Town Hall" meetings when he was confronted on this issue, or seek out the transcripts of R. v Turner; something I can't imagine happening. There will be no "proceeding further", as you can't leave well enough alone and get something resembling a life, it seems. Why this obsesive interest in Fantino anyway? Ugh. All I was trying to do was further publicise how he blatantly fucked others over to maintain - and elevate - his career. [unsigned]

I'm no fan of Fantino myself, but your edits have to be written from a neutral point of view to be acceptable. Your edits thus far have been obvious axe-grinding. CJCurrie 22:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to back up CJCurrie here. WP:NPOV is not a negotiable rule; all articles on Wikipedia must follow it. Which doesn't mean we can't include criticism — what it means is that we have to be careful how the criticism is written. Frex, consider the difference between "he is an asshole" and "councillor John Smith called him an asshole in media comments following the incident". And, for the record, I'm no fan of Fantino either, but as a Wikipedia administrator I have a responsibility to separate my personal feelings about the man from objective, neutral presentation of him in an encyclopedia article. Bearcat 22:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

This articles is not neutral. sorrey.

I've added and fleshed out incidents involving Fantino and the gay community and protestors.. along with some supporting references. I've tried my best to keep a neutral POV, but I welcome feedback. One thing I haven't done is attempted to balance the negative examples with positive ones. (My gut feeling is there aren't many good ones.. discussion doesn't have to stay neutral, right?) --geoff_o (talk) 20:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)