Jump to content

Talk:Václav Klaus: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Oy (talk | contribs)
m main idea highlighted
Rikapt (talk | contribs)
→‎Bias: How to solve the issue?: Supporting the opinion article is biased
Line 14: Line 14:
In addition let me express an important note aimed namely at the Czech users: Articles on English Wikipedia are read not only by the Czechs, but also by the rest of the World, by the people who know nothing about the Czech Republic and the political situation there. This means that although you are free to air your personal complexes here, an article on a Czech president gives opinion on the whole country to a foreign reader. Do not force these unwarped people to think the Czech Republic is just a kind of "banana republic", not worth mentioning at all. It is not true, you know it. They don't. And I doubt this pack of inconsistent and biased information makes any good to them nor to any other reader.
In addition let me express an important note aimed namely at the Czech users: Articles on English Wikipedia are read not only by the Czechs, but also by the rest of the World, by the people who know nothing about the Czech Republic and the political situation there. This means that although you are free to air your personal complexes here, an article on a Czech president gives opinion on the whole country to a foreign reader. Do not force these unwarped people to think the Czech Republic is just a kind of "banana republic", not worth mentioning at all. It is not true, you know it. They don't. And I doubt this pack of inconsistent and biased information makes any good to them nor to any other reader.
<p align="right">--[[User:Black&amp;White|Black&amp;White]] ([[User talk:Black&amp;White|talk]]) 01:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)</p>
<p align="right">--[[User:Black&amp;White|Black&amp;White]] ([[User talk:Black&amp;White|talk]]) 01:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)</p>
:: I very much agree with you. It has already came to my mind the article is biased before. That it makes a bad image (while IMHO untrue) of whole Czech Republic is a good point. -- [[User:Rikapt|Rikapt]] ([[User talk:Rikapt|talk]]) 09:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 09:26, 17 February 2008

WikiProject iconBiography: Politics and Government Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
WikiProject iconCzech Republic Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Czech Republic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Czech Republic 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.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I hope nobody minds that I launched a brand new talk page. The previous one imho did not meet its purpose and did not reflect the current state of the article - apart from the latest posts, that had remained untouched, though.

Bias: How to solve the issue?

I suppose the discussed article matches hardly any principles, that are to be respected while posting comments on this site. Now, it appears to be more a complaint page of the people, that strongly dislike Václav Klaus and/or any right-wing activity on the Czech political stage.

I suggest all uncited statements, assumptions and speculations be cleaned up (which would compress the article to the minimum) so that we can start adding relevant information, supported by references and cited sources, and mentioning just facts, not opinions. The articles simply must be neutral, if there is any effort present to carry out the meaning of the word "encyclopedic". It is not a proper place, where opponents of any person should spit nails and slander or, on the other hand, where backers should praise them.

In addition let me express an important note aimed namely at the Czech users: Articles on English Wikipedia are read not only by the Czechs, but also by the rest of the World, by the people who know nothing about the Czech Republic and the political situation there. This means that although you are free to air your personal complexes here, an article on a Czech president gives opinion on the whole country to a foreign reader. Do not force these unwarped people to think the Czech Republic is just a kind of "banana republic", not worth mentioning at all. It is not true, you know it. They don't. And I doubt this pack of inconsistent and biased information makes any good to them nor to any other reader.

--Black&White (talk) 01:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I very much agree with you. It has already came to my mind the article is biased before. That it makes a bad image (while IMHO untrue) of whole Czech Republic is a good point. -- Rikapt (talk) 09:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]