Talk:Ilias Kasidiaris

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Forum Comments do not meet Wikipedia Standards[edit]

Anonymous comments on Stormfront's forum do not meet standards of Wikipedia. And it is probably a bunch of hoaxsters posting on Stormfront's forum as usual. Also, Hope not Hate is itself just a blog. 96.254.154.47 (talk) 01:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Are you suggesting the picture on that piece is photoshopped as well? Hope not hate is a reliable source and is used extensively throughout the project. The blog you keep inserting is not. Furthermore, please stop changing 'swastika' to 'gammadion'. The name used in English for that shape is swastika. Even on wikipedia itself, gammadion redirects to the article on swastikas. As per WP:COMMONNAME, that is the word the article should use. You seem to be completely unaware of how wikipedia works. Please edit according to policy. Dolescum (talk) 05:00, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Both are blogs, the entire section violates wikipedia standards. Hope not Hate is not a recognized news source, it is a blog, and it is probably the blogger of Hope not Hate who posted those anonymous comments on Stormfront's forum. Also the picture, perhaps indeed photoshopped, does not look anything like the man. 96.254.154.47 (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
No, the Hope not Hate site is not a blog. Take a look at their article. If the image is photoshopped, can you please offer some evidence of that, because given a choice between believing a journalists publication and random stranger posting on a wikipedia talk page, I'm inclined to believe the journalist, as per WP:OR. Dolescum (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
The Hope not Hate blog employs anonymous comments on a forum, completely unacceptable. How do we know that Hope not Hate did not post those comments themselves ? They probably did. 96.254.154.47 (talk) 15:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
You could claim that about any piece of investigative journalism. Now, do you have any proof that the image presented in their article is a forgery, as you claimed? Dolescum (talk) 16:14, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia will never allow anonymous posts purported to be real, completely unacceptable. And that photo looks absolutely nothing like him ! 96.254.154.47 (talk) 16:17, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
If a reliable source claims that is Kasidiaris in that image, it is incumbent upon you to present evidence that it is not. The material posted on the Hope not Hate site is considered reliable, just look at it's use in the English Defence League article. Do you have any evidence their publication is wrong? Dolescum (talk) 16:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
EDL is a radical extremist group, unacceptable by Wikipedia as a source. If Hope not Hate is cited there again using anonymous comments on a forum, it must be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.154.47 (talk) 16:28, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
The article is about the EDL, not by them. Are you a native english speaker? Anyway, the picture seems completely unrelated to the forum posts, for starters. A Greek MP walking around with a swastika printed onto his arm is notable given the historical baggage around that particular symbol, otherwise Hope not Hate would not have remarked on it. Given the prior history of this source having been judged reliable, I suggest you consult WP:RSN if you disagree. Dolescum (talk) 16:39, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
No photos allowed off of blogs or off of forums. And no anonymous posts. Wikipedia rules. 96.254.154.47 (talk) 16:49, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Well, I headed over to WP:RSN myself, who confirm that, yes, that is a reliable source. There was also an article in El Mundo featuring his tattoo presented there. So, it seems you're incorrect about this. Dolescum (talk) 18:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia has its own rules that we follow here. No anonymous posts, no photos off of forums. 96.254.154.47 (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Firstly, you understand that El Mundo is the second most read newspaper in Spain, don't you? That's not a picture from a forum. You also understand you're supposed to follow wikipedia policies when editing articles, don't you? Dolescum (talk) 18:19, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The El Mundo article is acceptable, I just now added it myself. 18:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.154.47 (talk)
Thank you. Dolescum (talk) 18:28, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
No problem, El Mundo is fine, but no anonymous posts off of Stormfront's forum where anybody can write anything. Stormfront's forum is filled with phony posts. 96.254.154.47 (talk) 18:33, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Usefulness[edit]

The article almost exclusively consists on a report about that brawl with that Communist. We would like to learn more about what Mr Kasidiaris stands for as a politicians and what policies he supports. --41.150.174.67 (talk) 10:56, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Another awful article[edit]

Firstly the "Swastika" tattoo he has is an ancient Greek symbol found throughout ancient Greek artefacts including the Parthenon. Saying its' "similar to the swastika" is biased and an uneducated guess, thus totally wrong.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.186.130.4 (talk)

I love this type of comment. If you feel it is inaccurate, feel free to edit it. Anyone can!Egghead06 (talk) 03:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Tattoo[edit]

"Kasidiaris bears a tattoo on his arm of an ancient Greek meander symbol,[4] widely and incorrectly reported as swastika composed of Grecian Key meanders, a logo of his party.[5]" The tattoo is clearly a swastika... as can be seen in the source provided Orgyn (talk) 18:12, 19 August 2016 (UTC)