Jump to content

Talk:David Miliband: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 83: Line 83:


== Religion in infobox ==
== Religion in infobox ==
Mr. Miliband is Jewish. And so his religion is Judaism, which is a 'historic religion' not a transcendental one, meaning a 'nation' as in the old civilizations 'god' was synonimous of nation. So assur was the god/nation/capital of the assyrians and yvwh the god/nation of the yvwish. Only when the Romans invented the word nation, Rome changed from being a god to a nation. In the same manner the bible is the book of history of judaism. One has to be scientific also about religions, and those facts explained by campbell, marx and chomsky are crystal clear. Miliband's God/ nation is therefore Judaism/ Israel. though he is also british. So he has two gods/nations. As it happen with Mr. Cameron... The wikipedia seems to me blatantly pro-jewish in all themes - given the fact that the owner/founder is Jewish, this to an extent is natural. Yet it should not hide the scientific facts about the god/nation of judaism and the double god/nationality of the heads of parties in England. Moreover i have spotted other error: the proper translation of am Segullah is not 'chosen people', but people of the treasure. Segullah is treasure. This erroneous translation persits and it is policed incesantly, when changed. The 'people of the treasure' again form a nation/god which have made indeed of the accumulation of money its go(l)d, as Marx said: 'money is the worldly religion of Judaism'. We are here to reveal the scientific truth on this historic facts, as encyclopedias should do, since religions are historic elements, regardless of its internal myth structure. Or do we have to respect the myth that a goatkeeper from the bronze age, called moses, who saw a bush burning saw god? Myths are the content of religious books not of scientific encyclopedias.
Mr. Miliband is Jewish: "Being Jewish must have an influence on the way I think. I am the child of Jewish immigrants and that is a very important part of my identity." - from Josephs, Bernard (2006-12-22). "David Miliband: Red to green in a generation". The Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved 2009-11-30. And so his religion is Judaism, which is a 'historic religion' not a transcendental one, meaning a 'nation' as in the old civilizations 'god' was synonimous of nation. So assur was the god/nation/capital of the assyrians and yvwh the god/nation of the yvwish. Only when the Romans invented the word nation, Rome changed from being a god to a nation. In the same manner the bible is the book of history of judaism. One has to be scientific also about religions, and those facts explained by campbell, marx and chomsky are crystal clear. Miliband's God/ nation is therefore Judaism/ Israel. though he is also british. So he has two gods/nations. As it happen with Mr. Cameron... The wikipedia seems to me blatantly pro-jewish in all themes - given the fact that the owner/founder is Jewish, this to an extent is natural. Yet it should not hide the scientific facts about the god/nation of judaism and the double god/nationality of the heads of parties in England. Moreover i have spotted other error: the proper translation of am Segullah is not 'chosen people', but people of the treasure. Segullah is treasure. This erroneous translation persits and it is policed incesantly, when changed. The 'people of the treasure' again form a nation/god which have made indeed of the accumulation of money its go(l)d, as Marx said: 'money is the worldly religion of Judaism'. We are here to reveal the scientific truth on this historic facts, as encyclopedias should do, since religions are historic elements, regardless of its internal myth structure. Or do we have to respect the myth that a goatkeeper from the bronze age, called moses, who saw a bush burning saw god? Myths are the content of religious books not of scientific encyclopedias.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Miliband&curid=19339264&diff=370921223&oldid=369821357 have this removed] without discussion on the basis of a consensus established on [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS|another article]], without a discussion on the infobox template itself, seems to be more than marginally incorrect, because it's an open invitation to apply standards between articles without general discussion, and on that basis, I reject it here as a slippery slope. Whatever next? [[User:Rodhullandemu|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#0000FF">Rodhull</span>]][[User_talk:Rodhullandemu|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#FF0000">andemu</span>]] 04:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Miliband&curid=19339264&diff=370921223&oldid=369821357 have this removed] without discussion on the basis of a consensus established on [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS|another article]], without a discussion on the infobox template itself, seems to be more than marginally incorrect, because it's an open invitation to apply standards between articles without general discussion, and on that basis, I reject it here as a slippery slope. Whatever next? [[User:Rodhullandemu|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#0000FF">Rodhull</span>]][[User_talk:Rodhullandemu|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#FF0000">andemu</span>]] 04:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
:Fair enough. I'm terribly sorry to encroach on a prior consensus. I did check the talk page first but missed the archive where discussion on this is contained. However... I have read [[Talk:David Miliband/Archive 1#the god question]] and [[Talk:David Miliband/Archive 1#Third Opinion]], but can't find where it was a consensus to include his non-religion in the infobox under the heading of religion. Is it possible we can revisit this? [[User:Donama|Donama]] ([[User talk:Donama|talk]]) 04:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
:Fair enough. I'm terribly sorry to encroach on a prior consensus. I did check the talk page first but missed the archive where discussion on this is contained. However... I have read [[Talk:David Miliband/Archive 1#the god question]] and [[Talk:David Miliband/Archive 1#Third Opinion]], but can't find where it was a consensus to include his non-religion in the infobox under the heading of religion. Is it possible we can revisit this? [[User:Donama|Donama]] ([[User talk:Donama|talk]]) 04:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:37, 25 September 2010

David's mother was adopted by the Strauss family - immigrants from Fulda, Germany who had fled their native country and had settled in Lordship Park in North London before the outbreak of the Second World War. She spent the War years in their home. Mr Bertel Strauss her adoptive father was a metal merchant and a devout practising Jew and was famous for his immense personal library of Judaica books catalogued as Ohel Baruch. (The library was sold at his death to Yeshiva University in New York City). David's mother rejected the Ultra-Orthodox mode of life of her adoptive parents and had little or no connection with the Strauss family after the War ended.

Better Pic

The current pic is horrendous.

Please feel free to provide a better one; I'm sure if you hang around Whitehall for long enough, you'll catch him, and you'll be able to upload it to Commons with a free licence. In the meantime, we are stuck with what we have. Rodhullandemu 00:24, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of positions held

This list has been added, IMO it is not of any added value as the infoboxs are there telling us exactly the same thing, any comments, the editor in Q seems to be moving around similarly on other political articles. Comments? Off2riorob (talk) 13:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC) :I've reverted it. Most of it is redundant to the infobox, and what isn't is discussed immediately below in the prose. In addition to being excess verbiage, it breaks up the natural flow of the section in which it was put. -Rrius (talk) 14:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC) ::Thanks, yes I agree with you completely, I'll have a chat to the user about it. Off2riorob (talk) 15:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last brothers to be in cabinet together

I know little of this subject but if you look at the article at the top of the page it says it was the Chamberlains but in the section titled 'Foreign Secretary' it says that the last brothers to be simultaneously in cabinet were Edward and Oliver Stanley in the 1930s. I can't glean any definitive information on this subject from either Edward or Oliver Stanleys' pages. This may be because the chamberlains are half brothers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.38.111 (talk) 17:45, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grandpa Samuel revisited

On this page http://www.marxists.org/glossary/people/m/i.htm in the 'Encyclopaedia of Marxism' it says David's grandfather Samuel Miliband did serve in the Red Army in the 'Wars of Intervention' - shorthand for the Polish-Soviet War. Sam's Red Army stint is also mentioned elsewhere and also in several newspaper articles, online. I want to add that detail very briefly in the sentence about Samuel. We shouldn't go into any detail about the Polish-Soviet war at all, for relevancy's sake. But I think this mention of Sam in the Red Army is fascinating encyclopaedic family background. It is relevant because David's profile is much to do with his family background, the Holocaust survivors and the Marxists, so just a little more detail to add to the family story is entirely merited. No political bias here. -Chumchum7 (talk) 15:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is very relevant to this subject at all and we have had this discussion previously and there are two versions of the story one says he was and one says he wasn't so we left it out as it adds little relevance to the thinking of this subject and the validity and verifiability of content was disputed. Off2riorob (talk) 16:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for the reply. Please could you point me to the source that says Samuel was not a Red Army soldier in the Polish-Soviet War? -Chumchum7 (talk) 18:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BTW i just took a look at David Cameron#Family for comparison. It seems much more thorough than the section we have here, goes back further in the generations, and is perhaps a precedent for how we can improve this article. -Chumchum7 (talk) 18:17, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a big supporter of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS . The Cameron family history is incomparable to Miliband's family history, for the time being I am heavily occupied elsewhere, but please feel free to search the archives also you could present here on the talkpage the specific addition and the citation that you wish to support it with and other editors can comment on it, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 18:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With respect, I haven't seen the version of the story that says Samuel wasn't in the Red Army, and I would like to see it. All I have seen is several sources giving the version that Samuel was in the Red Army. It seems uncontroversial, and far more relevant than the fact that he was a 'trained leather worker'. I propose changing "His paternal grandfather, Samuel, a trained leather worker, left Poland immediately after World War One, settling in Brussels by 1920" to "His Polish Jewish paternal grandfather, Samuel, fought for the Soviets in the Polish-Soviet War and then settled in Brussels by 1920." This is verifiable. -Chumchum7 (talk) 23:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
IMO it has got little relevance here but you are welcome to your position, the citation you have brought so far is a bit primary, the marxist org, and I would not personally like to see this content cited to this source alone, but we can wait for more opinions and take the source to the rs noticeboard, perhaps you would like to start an article about this person? Is it his involvement in the red army that you see as worthy of addition? Sorry if I appear to not be interested in this but imo it adds nothing to this article, did David actually meet him or was he dead before David was born? Off2riorob (talk) 00:04, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your perfectly reasonable point. I agree the marxist website is a bit primary, and there are several mainstream newspaper articles that can also be added. IMO this is totally relevant primarily because David is one of the highest profile politicians in the UK and politicians' family background is always of interest because it is part of their persona. Moreover, David Miliband refers to his family background very conspicuously, he proactively utilizes it in building his persona. He reminds us that his father was a respected Marxist thinker, and that his mother is a Holocaust survivor. He reminds us that he was moulded by the family talks around the kitchen table about politics and history and socialism. So even though he chooses not to talk about it as much, it is equally interesting that his Polish grandfather fought against Poland in the Red Army (and also quit it), and there are plenty of sources stating this, with none to my mind suggesting anyone (including David) has ever challenged this version of events. Some POV editors may try to use the fact for political reasons, but that is not my goal. Actually any editor who starts to do POV smearing of David's family background should be reminded that Samuel quit the Red Army and the Soviet Union. At the same time, POV editors trying to gag mention of Samuel's past for fear of a smear should also not be allowed to block information. In a neutral manner, I want to include a verifiable fact - no value judgements. I will carefully watch this page and I will not allow it to get used for political or propaganda purposes. In particular, I will not accept any POV editors making Anti-Semitic hints about this fact, nor will I accept any POV editors suggesting the inclusion of this fact is Anti-Semitic. -Chumchum7 (talk) 08:22, 19 February 2010 (UTC)h[reply]
If this is an allegation of Anti-Semitism, it should be reported to Wikipedia moderators immediately. -Chumchum7 (talk) 11:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The page for the report is WP:Wikiquette alerts. -Chumchum7 (talk) 12:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For your information, a heads up that I've reported our disagreement at WP:3O#Activedisagreements and have requested a third editor take a look at this Anti-Semitism issue. Thanks, -Chumchum7 (talk) 12:20, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion

  • Just to clear the air, Off2riorob's accusation of antisemitism is completely off the wall and unfounded as far as I can see. Off2riorob, remember to assume good faith.
  • Was the grandfather's involvement in the Red Army an important influence on David in some way? If a connection can't be made relevant to the subject at hand, then we don't really need to include this. The connection should be made explicit. Leaving something like this open ended with an implied assumption about the connection could be POV.
  • We don't need to take sides in controversies of fact, we can just include both versions and say who said what and leave it at that.
  • Marxism.org probably shouldn't be used to back up anything too controversial. Find higher quality secondary sources.

Hope this helps. Gigs (talk) 14:04, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, perhaps you need to read the comment a bit more, the comments about anto sematism are from chum chum, I dispute his assertions about it, I have not said he is being anti sematic but that he is the person entering here and throwing comments around that other people are anti sematic, bacically its rubbish and you appear to have not understood the issue, feel free to discuss yourcomments as you seem to have misunderstood the issue completely. thanks Off2riorob (talk) 23:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gigs for your speedy and constructive response. -Chumchum7 (talk) 14:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Other than existing newspaper quotes from David that his family's Jewish and Marxist background did help him to form his politics, I very much doubt we'll find anything that specifically says Sam's Red Army career per se was an important influence. But we don't have anything saying Sam's training as a leather worker is an important influence either. My judgement is that the Red Army experience is more relevant than the leather working, though both can be mentioned. -Chumchum7 (talk) 14:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would gladly cite two versions of the facts, but I can only see one version. I've looked with great interest and I can't find a single source saying Sam wasn't in the Red Army. It would be great to see it. -Chumchum7 (talk) 14:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about Marxism.org -Chumchum7 (talk) 14:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grandparents

Do we really need to add to this .... David Miliband is the elder son of Jewish immigrants Marion Kozak and the late Marxist intellectual Ralph Miliband, who fled Belgium during World War II.[2] Both his paternal grandparents lived in the Jewish quarter of Warsaw. His paternal grandfather, Samuel, a trained leather worker, left Poland immediately after World War One, settling in Brussels by 1920.[3] His paternal grandmother, Renia (later known as Renée), also moved to Brussels, .......to clarify all of his grandparents were Jewish? It seems a bit pointy to me. Off2riorob (talk) 10:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMO its simply interesting that David Miliband is exclusively of Polish Jewish descent, as interesting as Barack Obama's Kenyan and Indonesian roots - nothing more than that. IMO it is verifiable and neutral fact. That's fine if you don't like the sentence, leave it out. I don't believe the fact that Samuel was a trained leather worker is more relevant than the fact that he was a soldier in the Red Army in the Polish-Soviet War. -Chumchum7 (talk) 12:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Poor additions

This has recently been added, can people please pay as much attention to the quality of the article as they care about adding their favorite addition...please don't add poorly formatted citations and citation farms..this addition is very poor and detrimental to the article as in..the article is of a lower quality after the addition..


fought against Poland in the Polish–Soviet War before moving to Belgium.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9] ....a citation farm and none of them formatted at all. Off2riorob (talk) 00:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

I've moved the criticism sections into the main body of the article - mostly to foreign secretary section. --h2g2bob (talk) 00:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request

{{editsemiprotected}} Can someone add that his sons' names are Isaac and Jacob.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Redseasunderredskies (talkcontribs) 13:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have had a lot of vandalism relating to his children's names in recent weeks. Do you have a reliable source that can confirm those names? Road Wizard (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. It was not hard to find a reliable source for this. Tim Pierce (talk) 18:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps not, but we should always encourage new users to find sources to support the information they wish to add. Road Wizard (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Schooling

The Wikipedia entry for Haverstock Comprehensive School claims both Miliband brothers as alumni. Can anyone confirm the dates each brother attended this school ? RGCorris (talk) 08:49, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Religion in infobox

Mr. Miliband is Jewish: "Being Jewish must have an influence on the way I think. I am the child of Jewish immigrants and that is a very important part of my identity." - from Josephs, Bernard (2006-12-22). "David Miliband: Red to green in a generation". The Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved 2009-11-30. And so his religion is Judaism, which is a 'historic religion' not a transcendental one, meaning a 'nation' as in the old civilizations 'god' was synonimous of nation. So assur was the god/nation/capital of the assyrians and yvwh the god/nation of the yvwish. Only when the Romans invented the word nation, Rome changed from being a god to a nation. In the same manner the bible is the book of history of judaism. One has to be scientific also about religions, and those facts explained by campbell, marx and chomsky are crystal clear. Miliband's God/ nation is therefore Judaism/ Israel. though he is also british. So he has two gods/nations. As it happen with Mr. Cameron... The wikipedia seems to me blatantly pro-jewish in all themes - given the fact that the owner/founder is Jewish, this to an extent is natural. Yet it should not hide the scientific facts about the god/nation of judaism and the double god/nationality of the heads of parties in England. Moreover i have spotted other error: the proper translation of am Segullah is not 'chosen people', but people of the treasure. Segullah is treasure. This erroneous translation persits and it is policed incesantly, when changed. The 'people of the treasure' again form a nation/god which have made indeed of the accumulation of money its go(l)d, as Marx said: 'money is the worldly religion of Judaism'. We are here to reveal the scientific truth on this historic facts, as encyclopedias should do, since religions are historic elements, regardless of its internal myth structure. Or do we have to respect the myth that a goatkeeper from the bronze age, called moses, who saw a bush burning saw god? Myths are the content of religious books not of scientific encyclopedias. have this removed without discussion on the basis of a consensus established on another article, without a discussion on the infobox template itself, seems to be more than marginally incorrect, because it's an open invitation to apply standards between articles without general discussion, and on that basis, I reject it here as a slippery slope. Whatever next? Rodhullandemu 04:35, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I'm terribly sorry to encroach on a prior consensus. I did check the talk page first but missed the archive where discussion on this is contained. However... I have read Talk:David Miliband/Archive 1#the god question and Talk:David Miliband/Archive 1#Third Opinion, but can't find where it was a consensus to include his non-religion in the infobox under the heading of religion. Is it possible we can revisit this? Donama (talk) 04:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli relations

Well known ex-patriate Israeli academic and musician Gilad Atzmon has recently (14.September 2010) held a talk where he claimed and pointed at documents that were public until recently that Milliband was on a israeli list as a friend of israel and could be trusted to push israeli propaganda. source: http://vimeo.com/14884763 Nunamiut (talk) 00:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A-levels

It's utterly absurd to include his A-level grades in this article! Even David Cameron's A-level grades are not mentioned in Wikipedia!!! Would someone please remove it?!!!