Talk:Gigi Becali

It seems that the Becalis were minions of Ceausescu's regime. The family were mainly sheperds and were selling dairy products to various foreigners living in Romania [diplomats, students, Arabs...]. Big underground business despite the socialist state. Hence they were full of dollars despite the fact that Ceausescu's law was forbidding the possesion of foreign currency. Gigi Becali publicly admitted in a TV talkshow that in 1989 he had some 150.000 USD. Gained how? Him and his cousin Ioan were involved in the underground business [buy/sell]with Western merchandise, under the umbrella of Securitate [Ceausescu's secret police], especially in the Black Sea coast's resorts. His cousin Ioan was pretending to be Italian in front of western female tourists in order to scam them [from were the "Giovanni" nickname]. Nevertheless, Gigi Becali is a philantropist and lots of families from his Pipera area adore him. It is presumed that he knows lots of things about Ceausescu's overthrown, reason for which all governments are living him alone. As a diverse fact it is interesting to know that under Ceausescu's regime some sheperds were so rich that they were asking him to allow them to buy a... helicopter in order to survey their herds. They had the money [shepherds of Jina and Poiana in Sibiu county] for a helicopter ! Of course Ceausescu did not give the OK. Recently media stated that Gigi Becali's fortune exceeds 500 million USD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bogdangiusca (talk • contribs)

Due to Romania's high corruption rate, George Becali may buy his way to presidency. After all, all state institutions are ok with recieving some "investments" in change for electoral support. This includes school, churches, the army, etc. This shows the obvious contradiciton between his self-proclaimed moral integrity and his corrupted mind that would do anything to gain political power. He is an insult to anything Romania stands for, to democracy and to freedom. He is an ordinary mob boss, thirsty for power and public recognition. He is the best example of the results of the communist regime, the way it destroyed our people and thier souls. He claims to be a Christian, a philantropist, but he is ready to buy his seat in Heavens. He would bribe St Peter himself for a free entrance though the pearly gates. Sad but true, as mentatus said, Romaniam people actuallu believe what this scumbag says. so sad... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.34.75.174 (talk • contribs)

It is George not GIGI!!!!

It has been said before: Gigi is a nickname - the actual name is "George". I asked for it to be moved to George Becali, because of this reason, it was, and now someone undoes this, and brings it back to Gigi? May I at least know why?
I'm gonna ask for it to be moved again, and will not remove the demand, unless someone comes with a good reason (which I fail to find).diego_pmc (talk) 23:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Is it George or Gheorghe? And... most of the references talk about "Gigi Becali" and since Wikipedia is about references not about truth this page might very well remain here. -- AdrianTM (talk) 23:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Geroge (look here). IMO, it should be called, as he's called, not nicked. The Romanian article for example is called Gorge, not Gigi. BTW, this: "Wikipedia is about references not about truth" must be the worst argument ever.;) Encyclopedias are bout the truth as far as I know. diego_pmc (talk) 07:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

well if you are such a firm believer in truth and want to have a bit of fun read WP:TRUTH... the thing is many public persons are listed under the names they were known at the time they became famous not under the real name from passport, see Stalin for example... -- AdrianTM (talk) 07:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't oppose strongly against the move, I just mentioned how other cases are treated on WP. If other people support the move that's fine by me. Start a poll... -- AdrianTM (talk) 07:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

It's Gheorghe, not George. Basketballoneten 18:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Found free image

[[Gigi-george-becali.jpg]]
It's from a press conference, so i guess it must be free. diego_pmc (talk) 07:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think this is enough, it depends who took the picture and if they released it under a free license -- AdrianTM (talk) 07:42, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

OMFG

I know this is not a forum, but... This page has more edits than the articles on Mihai Eminescu, Carol I of Romania or Stephen the Great. I am not actually that shocked, but extremely saddened that this article about a person who hasn't actuall done ANYTHING for Romania except sell tabloids and probably instigated to violence gets this much attention. Nergaal (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Information is not bad in itself, Hitler probably gets a lot of edits too, I assume more than Beethoven... in the end who cares, people get the info they look for. AdrianTM (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Eminescu gets less edits for the simple fact that he's long dead, and every matter concerning him is long settled, therefore no contradictions. Becali on the other hand is alive (therefore every day there might be something new to add about him), and very controversial. Importance of that character has nothing to do with it here. diego_pmc (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I understand the reasons (as I said I am not that surprised), but I am still saddened. I bet there are other examples of Romanian persons still alive that are more important and still get less attention. As for the Hitler comparrison; while neat, still think that he actually did something, even though really bad; while the case here barely did anything. Nergaal (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Move to George Becali

I think it's better to move it to George Becali. Anton Tudor (talk) 17:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names):

Convention: Use the most common name of a person

This applies to everyone. That's why we have the article named Bill Clinton, not "William Clinton", which is his real name.

The press uses the name "Gigi Becali" far more often than "George Becali", so this is the most common name and that's why this article should stay in place. bogdan (talk) 18:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

All right, but I remember when Gigi runed for elections. He had full name taken from CI (carte de identitate) on the papers. Anton Tudor (talk) 18:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

That's irrelevant, see the convention: "use the most common name of a person": googlefight AdrianTM (talk) 18:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose for same reasons as above. Gigi for article title, then put is full name in bold text in the opening sentence. I think this is most normal for biography pages. Whydontyoucallme dantheman (talk) 19:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose, from what I see of the arguments here there doesn't seem to be any real dispute so far that "Gigi" is the name commonly used, and thus the proper one to occupy the one slot available for the article's name. If more evidence of use other variants is presented, my opinion could change. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• Not strong evidence for usage, but I have read several (English language) articles about this man, and all have referred to him as Gigi. More evidence of usage other than the simple Google test would be nice. If required, I will look for the archived copies. Knepflerle (talk) 15:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Sunteti mai nesimtiti ca Becali

Ethnicity = Aromanian?? La Hagi cand am scris asta ati sters in 24 de ore. Cum... Hagi e roman 100%, "macedo-roman" i-auzi, si alte vrajeli scrise si prin presa; dar de Gigi Becali... E "makedon", e "aroman", nu e roman, e complet diferit. Ce caractere aveti, mai rau ca Becali sunteti.

Sunt complet de acord sa scrieti ca e "Aromanian", dar scrieti asa si despre Hagi, Caragiale, Toma Caragiu, Nicu Constantin, Elena Ghoerghe, Zicu etc Doar cand va convine scrieti ca e makedon? Or ii asumati pe toti or pe niciunul... 89.35.62.12 (talk) 04:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)