Talk:Adriano Sofri

Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Politics and Government Start‑class

	Biography portal 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

Journalism Unassessed

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
???	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.

Neutral lead?

I am trying to find as neutral as possible a way of mentioning, in the lead, the Calabresi question. Now I have put it as "[Sofri] was arrested in 1988 and convicted to 22 years of prison, having been considered guilty of being the instigator of the murder of Luigi Calabresi, a police officer suspected (but deemed innocent by a court) of having killed the anarchist Giuseppe Pinelli". We should avoid expression such as "A killed/did not kill B": we should write "a tribunal deemed A guilty of the murder of B", "X accused A of having murdered B", "Y campaigned about the innocence of A" and so on instead. These are verifiable facts, the former is not. Of course, if someone can think a more neutral way of putting things, I shall be glad. Goochelaar (talk) 17:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if people reverting my edits would comment on them here. Anyway, for now I am not reverting the last reversion, but I wonder what is "non neutral" in the sentence "Luigi Calabresi, a police officer suspected (but deemed innocent by a court) of having killed the anarchist Giuseppe Pinelli". His alleged responsibilities in Pinelli's death were scritinized and the inquiry's conclusion was that he was innocent (hence the part "deemed innocent etc."); and if there were an inquiry it means that somebody suspected him. If my formulation made it sound as something else, I am sorry. If nothing else happens, I plan to reinstate my version in a week's time. Goochelaar (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A farce

This article is a farce. It's not an encyclopedia article: it tries to reverse the evidence produced in Italian courts, and to prove Sofri's innocence for the Calabresi murder.

The court case against Sofri was quite controversial, and produced conflicting verdicts and some sort of legal conundrum. However, the article is written from the point of view that Sofri is innocent.

This is against all of wikipedia rules.

Since there does not seem to be a lot of interest for this article, and I know very well that I cannot spend too much time on here, it's totally useless to make any modifications, so the usual suspects will have their day.

Sad, sad.Giordaano (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This artcile is not at all neutral: it is written by a "friend" of Sofri and it does not present the fact neutrally ! (Sorry, but I do not know how to sign) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.206.101.221 (talk) 08:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I remarked in the comment to my latest edit, we cannot say that Sofri was the instigator etc. We can say a court judged him to be the instigator etc. Do not you agree? (To sign, it is sufficient to type four tilde characters ~, or to click on the signature button, above, the tenth from left.) Goochelaar (talk) 10:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I repeat : the article is written entirely from the point of view of someone who wants to prove Sofri's innocence. It's absolutely not NPOV. I will try to make some edits, with time Giordaano (talk) 12:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Murderer

Would you be pleased to describe as "murderer" people who kill other people? Otherwise we can describe Hitler as soap producer being you so well disposed towards murderers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.54.8.110 (talk) 22:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sofri was a terrorist, he ordered the murder of a policeman who is literally the icon of Italian terrorism victim's Day. Whoever is deleting that from the bio is doing vandalism.

Sofri or Pietrostefani (convicted for the same felony) are called ex-terrorists on a numbers of international newspapers. Their organization Lotta Continua has academic papers where it is cited as a terroristic organization. The policeman murdered by them received the Gold medal in memoriam as a victim of terrorism by the Italian President of the Republic. On the Day remembering victims of terrorism, the policeman family (Calabresi family) has been regularly called to speak in Parliament for decades. The usual argument "they were never convicted for terrorism, only for murder!!!" is lazy and dumb. Lots of terrorists in Italy were convicted for standard murder and yet they remained terrorists. See the story of Cesare Battisti Odisseo99 (talk) 01:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yours is vandalism, as your tone and words show. Wikipedia serves the truth, not the clear partisanship and rage of your motivations. You are cherry picking your arguments. Any serious source in Italy do not refer to Lotta Continua as a terrorist organization and to Sofri as a former terrorist (Wikipedia itself: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotta_Continua): the foreign sources you quote are obviously more superficial and refer to terrorism and terrorist in general, never accusing Sofri of being a terrorist.

The definition is simply wrong and mistifying for any reader, betraying the mission of this page. 87.14.204.241 (talk) 11:17, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He is celebrated as a victim of terrorism by the Italian State and by all Italian elected representatives almost every year, how could I be cherry-picking? I don't think you know what that means. Also, I don't get what's wrong with my "superficial foreign sources". Literally the first source is the English site of the National Italian Agency ANSA, the biggest in Italy. Each source linked talks specifically about Sofri, Pietrostefani and Lotta Continua, and they are always referred as "terrorists" in the title or in the body of the article. How can they be *vague*??? The New York Times wrote two articles exclusively about the trial of Sofri, calling it a "terrorist case"! And they are linked too.

In order to be convicted of terrorism, you need to be investigated for terrorism. And it's a little bit difficult to be investigated for such a crime, if your terroristic organization was disbanded and your trial started thanks to a spontaneous confession 13 years later... I am angry because THIS is cherrypicking and it is the usual lazy argument used by Sofri sympathizers for 20 years, I'm tired of explaining the obvious. In fact usually, when you point out to real international sources, they get dismissed because they are "superficial" and because Italian sympathizers of Sofri obviously know better than those unpleasant newspapers. Just like you did now.

Uh and Lotta Continua was also a terrorist organization. Not only that, it was also a militant intellectual circle of course (as explained on Wikipedia), but it was a terrorist organization for sure. Cesare Battisti was a militant and became an international terrorist. Others went with the Red Brigades. Its leaders are convicted of having organized a command to tail and kill the police officer Luigi Calabresi, after 3 years of public shaming on their own propaganda newspaper. It checks all the boxes of a terroristic organization. @87.14.204.241: Odisseo99 (talk) 07:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uh and by the way, Sofri himself defined the murder of Calabresi a "terroristic act", in a lengthy interview on the main Italian newspaper Corriere. Of course he claimed his innocence as usual, but he himself recognized the meaning of that murder... because is quite obvious, and you need to be imbued of ideology if you don't to see it. https://www.corriere.it/cronache/09_gennaio_08/sofri_libro_77a23c7c-dd8e-11dd-9758-00144f02aabc.shtml

And this is RAI, the main Italian media defining Pietrostefani an "ex-terrorist". As you can see the consensus is both Italian and international. https://www.rainews.it/amp/articoli/2022/07/la-corte-dapello-di-parigi-nega-lestradizione-richiesta-dallitalia-per-i-10-ex-terroristi-rossi-motivazioni-sono-passati-molti-anni-ba89fd6e-467e-43b0-a838-ea6c51198cf4.html Odisseo99 (talk) 07:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]