Talk:Adonis Georgiadis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Δεν θα 'πρεπε να το ενωσουμε με το Georgiades Bros ; User:Panosfidis

Νομίζω πως ο Άδωνις έχει περισσότερες δημόσιες δραστηριότητες από τον αδερφό του, καθώς και επίσημη θέση στο κόμμα του. Έτσι νομίζω πως το παρόν πρέπει να παραμείνει και η σελίδα για τους Georgiades Bros να παραμείνει ξεχωριστή ή να ενωθεί με τη σελίδα για την Ellinon Egersis που παρουσιάζουν μαζί. ReinesLicht 09:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK λογικο. user:Panosfidis

Κατά την δικιά μου άποψη η Λεονίδας Γεωργιάδης αποτελεί καθαρά διακοσμητικό στοιχείο στην εκπομπή μολονότι στους τίτλους της εκπομπής εμφανίζεται ως παρουσιαστής ενώ ο Άδωνις ως Guest και σχολιαστής, μολονότι φέρει (ο Άδωνις) το κύριο βάρος της εκπομπής. Αυτό γίνεται για προφανής λόγους ασυμβιβάστου με την πολιτική του ιδιότητα. Είναι χαρακτηριστικό ότι στις διάφορες σατυρικές εκπομπές όπου σατυρίζεται το εν λόγο τηλεοπτικό δύδιμο παρουσιάζεται να κουνάει το κεφάλη του καταφατικά να συμφωνεί μονολεκτικά με τον αδερφό του και όταν το αποφασίσει να μιλήσει τον διακόπτει πάντα ο Άδωνις. Και να σβηστεί το άρθρο του Λεονίδα Γεωργιάδη και να τοποθετηθεί στο άρθρο του Άδωνι δεν νομίζω να λήψει σε κανέναν.

--

Εσύ πάντως σχολείο δεν έχεις πάει ώστε να μάθεις να μιλάς και να γράφεις σωστά Ελληνικά, οπότε μέχρι να μπορείς να συνομιλήσεις σε ικανοποιητικό επίπεδο, από το αυτί και στον δάσκαλο μπάς και ξεστραβωθείς. Βέβαια παίζει να είσαι και ένας από αυτούς τους λαθρομετανάστες οπότε κάθε σχόλιο περιττεύει. Μην μας λέτε όμως μετά για την Wikipedia και το πόσο έγκριτη εγκυκλοπαίδεια είναι. Ένα χάλι και μισό όπου ο κάθε πικραμένος μπαίνει, γράφει ό,τι του καπνίσει χωρίς έλεγχο, έτσι για να βγάλει τα απωθημένα του. Ντροπή σας, αυτό το άρθρο προσβάλλει βάναυσα την έννοια νοημοσύνη.

Ο συνεργάτης "Χωρίς Όνομα".

-- δηλαδή εσύ κύριε "Χωρίς Όνομα" δε νιώθεις καθόλου πόσο ρεζίλι γίνεσαι, που έρχεσαι εδώ να σπύρεις την εθνικόφρονη "σοφία" σου, και να παρίστανεις τον αντικειμενικό λέγοντας τον άλλον λαθρομετανάστη;;; Είσαι τουλάχιστον όσο ξεφτίλες ειναι οι χρυσαυγίτες χρήστες του φέισμπουκ, που θίγονται όταν καταδικάζεται η ρατσιστική τους λογοδιάρρεια... Όλο σου το σχόλιο σε αφορά πριν αφορέσει κανέναν άλλο. Και μη χαλιέσαι αμα η Wikipedia δεν σε πληρεί αν δεν εκφράζει την άποψη σου. Φαντάσου πως θα ήταν το αρθρο του ΕΛΑΣ αμά καθε πορωμένος ΚΚΕς ερχόταν να πει τα δικά του... Εξ'αλλου, μπορείς να φτιαξεις δικιά σου, πες την "φασιστοπαίδεια", όπως κάνανε οι αλητήριοι μετά το μπάτσο που φάγανε στο φέισμπουκ. Έτσι να καθεστε μεταξύ σας να βράζετε στο ζουμί σας και στην φαντασιοπληξία σας...


Linguistic criticism link points to a main page of an author and not to specific criticism regarding Adonis Georgiades. Please correct this. ReinesLicht 12:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

neutrality issues[edit]

The article seems like it might have been created by the subject itself, or at least by a fan or party member. For example, the article does not even once mention the subject's anti-semitism, which is what he is mainly known for in Greece. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allinthebrain (talk • contribs) 20:08, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's not only known for being an antisemite, but also for deliberately distorting both historical essays and texts in order to make them fit in his nationalist rhetoric, as well as his character assassination attempts against people he considers "not patriotic enough". We'll get to it soon, though. Elp gr (talk) 12:01, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i agree that the article lacks neutrality. AG is not only anti-semitic, he's a greek suprematist, and the only reason he's not with the neo-nazis is because he's also an ultra-capitalist opened to the "pinochetisation" of Greece currently under way. He's also for a autoritary police state (so direct democracy my ass), and has explicitly expressed on TV the idea that a well functioning police should not be ashamed of killing innocent civilians in the course of its action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.194.8.73 (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy issues[edit]

1. Πουθενά στο σχετικό βίντεο δεν αναφέρει ότι οι αριστεροί "spoiling the legacy of a man, who should be remembered as a national hero for generations to come", το σχετικό χωρίο διαγράφεται

2. Πουθενά στο σχετικό βίντεο δεν αναφέρει για τους νέους του Πολυτεχνείου "spontaneous student youth uprising was manipulated by foreign secret agents", αντικαθιστώ τη λέξη manipulated με τη λέξη involved.

3. Πουθενά στο σχετικό βίντεο δεν αναφέρει ότι "there was no popular opposition to the military regime"

4. Η πηγή που παραπέμπει σε βίντεο στο οποίο υποτίθεται ότι λέει "the Jewish people by controlling the global banking system can use it as a weapon to blackmail and control foreign countries, including Greece" οδηγεί σε λογαριασμό μη ενεργό, επομένως το σχετικό χωρίο διαγράφεται.

5. Πουθενά δεν αναφέρει στο σχετικό βίντεο για το Ελληνικό Παρατηρητήριο του Ελσίνκι "as part of their attempt to compromise Greece's good name", η σχετική δήλωση διαγράφεται.

7. Αλλάζω το "couple years" σε "20 years", όπως αναφέρεται στο σχετικό βίντεο.

8. Το σχετικό βίντεο αναφέρεται στο θέμα με τη σχολική παρέλαση και τον Τσενάι, δεν κατηγόρησε συγκεκριμένα τον Γεωργιάδη, οπότε το συγκεκριμένο χωρίο διαγράφεται.

9. Στο σχετικό βίντεο δεν αναφέρει "and other garbage like that" αλλά "κάθε καρυδιάς καρύδι", οπότε το αφαιρώ προς αποφυγή παρεξηγήσεων. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gun frontier (talk • contribs) 03:57, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • The entire "Controversy" section is WP:OR from YouTube videos; per WP:BLPREMOVE, we must "remove immediately any contentious material ... that is a conjectural interpretation of a source". I've restored your edit; however, BLPs isn't my turf, so I'll wait to hear from other editors on whether the whole section oughta be binned. Alakzi (talk) 18:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, though I believe now it is much better. I will do one more minor correction, where it says "manipulated by secret agents". The verb "involved" represents his views more clearly (He believes that it was a spontaneous uprising of a bunch of students, and that secret agents took the opportunity to be involved so to serve their own agenda). Gun frontier (talk) 11:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Adonis Georgiadis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Adonis Georgiadis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:43, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Adonis Georgiadis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:29, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whitewashing[edit]

  • @SJCAmerican: There is no original research present in the section you are so desperately trying to remove. In fact the same section exists in the Greek language version of the article where it is even more detailed. Georgiadis has made numerous racist statements in his career, while also selling books by nazi apologists and modern day snake oil (nanojackets). If you speak Greek then I am just restating the obvious, if not then you are simply incapable of weighting which sources are reliable and which are not.--Catlemur (talk) 09:25, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is not Greek wikipedia, The sources listed were mostly links to youtube videos and statements made by Adonis. And one questionable website that no longer exists. And none of these sources point to significant controversy that was generated because of such statements. The sources provided is simple WP:OR. It seems some Greeks here have taken advantage of the fact that this article is not very popular among editors to push their own domestic political agenda. I will not deny that his comments can be perceived as controversial, but personal perceptions are not for wikipedia. If you want to add them you need to provide sources that there was significant controversy generated from these statements within society. What you can do alternatively is perhaps put these details under a "Views" section. A section describing his views on certain matters such as race. But of course that will then bring up a question of good faith and neutrality which you already seem to lack by using terms like Whitewashing and "Snake oil". I am not saying you cannot include these details but better sources are needed. Until then I will countunie to dispute SJCAmerican (talk) 05:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is snake oil because another TV personality was convicted of fraud for selling the EXACT SAME PRODUCT. What you are trying to do is nothing short of whitewashing since you deleted the whole section instead of removing only the youtube linked parts. Accusing people of pushing POV and then "bringing the question of good faith and neutrality" hahaha. Basically you expect people to provide 10 lines of commentary for each political scandal Georgiadis has been involved in, so as to prove it is a scandal. Which is in itself ridiculous. I do not see a point in debating about this article with you. A third party better take a look at this issue, someone who actually speaks the language.--Catlemur (talk) 07:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Again this is original research. It doesn't matter if someone speaks the language or not this is English wikipedia not Greek wikipedia if you are looking for a place with exclusively Greek speakers than go to Greek wikipedia being Greek and speaking Greek does not give you any right of ascendancy in an argument here. those youtube links are not reliable source material. You have still not provided any sources that any of these supposed scandals generated significant controversy. What I am trying to do is not whitewash anything but keep this wikipedia page up to par with community standards. Again you seem to have trouble understanding. Someone saying something or doing something you find controversial is irrelevant. You need to show with reliable source martials that these things generated controversy, not that they were simply said or done, but they were in fact controversial. Understand? If you can do that I will have no problem keeping this section, and if you don't want to do that than we can seek dispute resolutionSJCAmerican (talk) 04:36, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SJCAmerican and Catlemur: I brought back the text, with better sourses supporting it. I have to say that Lakis Lazopoulos commentary is a secondary source. I removed the description of Lazopoulos as his opponent, since that would be OR.Τζερόνυμο (talk) 07:05, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Τζερόνυμο: Thank you, these sources seem a bit better now!, Well some, a lot of the sources still mostly seem to be youtube links. And the issue of Neutrality, Balance and POV still has not been resolved. I believe this section still needs to be reworked. See wikipedia policy:
"Under Wikipedia's neutral point of view (NPOV) policy, articles must present differing viewpoints on the subject matter fairly, proportionately, and without bias. Articles should include both positive and negative viewpoints from reliable sources, without giving undue weight to particular viewpoints, either negative or positive. The policy of verifiability requires attributing all viewpoints to reliable, published sources, with appropriate citations. Wikipedia's policy against original research, in addition to the NPOV requirement, forbids editors from favoring their own point of view. Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons requires exercising special care in presenting negative viewpoints about living persons"
"In most cases separate sections devoted to criticism, controversies, or the like should be avoided in an article because these sections call undue attention to negative viewpoints. Articles should present the prevailing viewpoints from reliable sources fairly, proportionately, and without bias, whether positive or negative."
I would hardly describe a separate mixed bagged "controversy" section that takes up a big part of the article and is one of the biggest sections as meeting the criteria above. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to scale this section down a bit. Perhaps down to a short paragraph or few sentences? this article just seems rather strongly negative and unbalanced with that section taking up so much room. I understand that Adonis as a domestic figure is akin to Donald Trump in the U.S in that he generates strong opinions but I think we need to be careful to avoid too much of that on his wikipedia page. All articles need to be unbiased and more importantly, balanced and proportionate. Right now I think far too much space is taken by this section how do you feel about shrinking it? For now I will remove any statements that use youtube as a source, as these are just statement also this also brings up questions of copyright infringement. See wikipedia policy on external video/youtube SJCAmerican (talk) 19:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@SJCAmerican: I feel we can address the issues you mention without removing content. It seems to me that other sections of the article are not as developed as they should. Too many sections consisting of one or two sentences. As for the youtube sources, I did not add all youtube sources but let's discuss each source separately.Τζερόνυμο (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Τζερόνυμο: I mean we can, but that would require significantly bulking this article up. Until that is done the best thing to do would be to shrink it. I tried that myself right now can you let me know what you think?
Regarding youtube videos. These can't be used as a source. The videos are just of the statements being made, nothing to show they attracted controversy, furthermore Youtube sources not from the original publications shouldn't be used because of copyright infringement. These needed to be removed completely. SJCAmerican (talk) 19:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I dont agree with the removal of sourced material. Youtube videos can be secondary sources, if we can not add the link to the youtube video, we surely can cite the TV show stating the date it was televised. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 19:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Generally wikipedia doesn't allow it it needs to be a primary source or a reliable and irreplaceable secondary source. Furthermore these videos do nothing to illustrate "Controversy" they are just videos of the statement being made. I can understand why those statements are controversial because I myself find them controversial. But the source needs to show that the statement was not just made, but that it generated controversy. I mean this article is really unbalanced, if you go to Alexis Tsipras page you won't find similar section detailing all his controversies (which he has a lot of from what I know. Mati, Macedonian name dispute) you won't see a "Political attacks against the right" section because generally such sections shouldn't exist in the manner they do here. It is very unbalanced but I am willing to work with you guys hereSJCAmerican (talk)
The argument concerning Tsipras is whataboutism. Political attacks against the Left was a prominent figure of Georgiades who uses polemic rhetoric against the left constantly. A lot of refs in the article were citing unreliable sources, I just added the "citation needed" template. Τζερόνυμο (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has guidelines and standards so whataboutism is warranted here, every article on wikipedia has the same standards applied to it. also the source for Adnois on Albanians is just a video of the statement nothing indicating controversy from that statement SJCAmerican (talk) 20:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, since Wikipedia has guidelines and standards, arguments should be built on those guidelines, not on "look what is going elsewhere". Had the latter been the rule, we would be spreading erroneous edits everywhere. We might be getting off-topic though.Τζερόνυμο (talk) 20:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am fairly busy with IRL stuff right now, so I may come back to this later. The "sociology is a plot to make our kids commies" comment is also worth mentioning.--Catlemur (talk) 19:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is indeed extensive whitewashing going on here. He is an antisemite, who has held the most extreme nationalist views, this has to be mentioned in the article whether it i controversial or not. Also, his books were the product of plagiarism, the info is available on the Greek wikipedia.Greece666 (talk) 20:38, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The alleged antisemitism should be backed by reliable non-partizan sources, i.e. other than an Israeli newspaper based on the opinion of a Jewish NGO, and the leftist column "IOS" (the latter against the WP rules). Regarding the famous book of Plevris, the case was brought to Justice by the Israeli community of Greece, and K. Plevris was found innocent, if I remember well. We must see again the w.p. rules about articles on living persons and politicians.--Skylax30 (talk) 17:11, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Skylax30: Yeah every single source becomes a leftist tabloid the moment it criticizes Georgiadis apparently. If Geordiadis was never antisemitic then why did he verbally apologize to the Greek Jewish community? The darn commies must have forced the poor fellow at gunpoint.--Catlemur (talk) 17:21, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Elementary, my dear: Political correctness, for which New Democracy is constantly criticized. Voridis did the same when he became minister. Throwing back the ball to you, if he said something "antisemetic", why wasn't he sued by the Greek Jews as K. Plevris was?--Skylax30 (talk) 18:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Political attacks to the left[edit]

This section reads as if Georgiadis were a political maverick. In reality, these claims are common place among many Greek conservatives and no one associates these views with Georgiadis in particular. This should be clearly reflected in the section Greece666 (talk) 09:50, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Kind of funny, the only reference of the section is citation towards a non-Reliable Source. Cinadon36 17:49, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Historian[edit]

Georgiadis is a historian only in the sense that he studied history at University. Not sure this is enough to have him mentioned as historian in the first paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greece666 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To further my point, Konstantinos Karamanlis Jr, who has a PhD in history from Tufts is not mentioned as "historian". --Greece666 (talk) 17:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Far-right ideology[edit]

Having used several academic articles by well-known theorists to back my claims, I challenge the user who has been reverting me to present evidence against the claim that Georgiadis is far-right. Until then, please stop reverting this. It is a well-known fact that Georgiadis is tied to certain extreme movements and ideas. NikolaosFanaris (talk) 16:35, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Adonis_Georgiadis&oldid=1202261166"