Jump to content

Talk:Ján Slota

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

Image Removal

[edit]

Hi all, I removed the nazi images from the page and have referred the matter to the living persons biography board. It is very libelous to make that connection.... I dont like the man BUT there is no proof that he is a neo-nazi. If you would like to compare the images of eagles or other symbols please start that page. Otherwise refrain from this activity on this page. petethebeat —Preceding undated comment added 16:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC). --Petethebeat (talk) 17:07, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant sources

[edit]

It's kinda weird, that in an article about anti-hungarian politic, there are many Hungarian articles that can't be verified from both sides (both Slovakian and Hungarian), because of different language. Actually, why there are almost only anti-Slota articles in Hungarian language ? For example that one about Slota's illegal immigration to Austria. There's only one reference in Hungarian. This is not information neutrality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.98.232.16 (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

[edit]

To Juro: So, first of all I don´t know what is "wishy-washy", but I guess it has something to do with my revision being too much politically correct. Well, if you meant it this way, I can´t agree with you, because in my revison it was clearly stated that some of Slota´s statements are against Magyars and therefore xenophobic (is "xenophic" really the right word?). I also added that his statements were misconductful. I haven't changed your revision about his critics calling him extremely right and arrogant. So what is then "wishy-washy"? If I wrote that he makes statements about SMK, some of which are also against Magyars as a nation, it's simply true and if you followed Slota's speeches carefully, you would find it out. Mostly, in about 95 percent or more of his SMK speeches, he speaks only against the SMK. And why I deleted the mention of Roma? Well, you can keep it there, I only don't know of any latest Slota's words about the Roma, in fact, he doesn't speak about them as much as he used to. But anyway, this is not a big problem for me. But what does this mean: "extremely conservative prejudice"? What the hell is that? Well, if some leftist wants to write things like these on his homepage, he can, but does this really sound NPOV? Most conservatives would never accept any linking of their philosophy to any "extremism". And they also wouldn't agree that being against homosexuality is necesarilly based on prejudices. Oh, they know very well, why they are against. So this formulation itself is simply POV. I would like to hear from you what exactly is the "prejudice"? Another thing, I can't agree with the revision that Slota speaks against homosexuals. Again, when we follow his statements we see he is actually against homosexuality. But maybe you know some quotes i don't. If you know about such, when he spoke about homosexuals as persons, OK, we can keep the revision. I think that the idea of Wikipedia is that whoever reads it and is at least a little bit serious, whether he is leftist, rightist, Arab,Jewish, Slovak, Magyar, he shouldn't feel a strong protest when he reads an article. I want to write articles with contents that you won't have to protest inside (what you did not like about my revision was not content, but form) and I hope you want to write articles I won't have to protest inside. Wikipedia should simply be about facts. I think you just wrote how you FELT Slota's statements and not how they really are. Probably the best idea would be to publish some of them here - like controversial statements in Jean-Marie Le Pen. I think that would be most fair. Agree? Laddy or Liberal Nationalist 00:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Laddy, to put it short, he MAKES anti-Hungarian and other primitive xenophobic statements quite often, it is irrelevant whether he makes them in 70% of his speeches or in 30%, normal politicians do not make any such statements. I do not remember the details of your change, but the result was inacceptable, because it sounded like "the poor misunderstood person". And doing philosophy about even such issues is WWII (to put it politely), OK? I know you are a SNS fan, but everything has its limits, we do not live in the 19th century or in Siberia. Juro 16:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well,no. He makes statements about the SMK, that is the core. Statements against Magyars as a nation are just a small precent as I said. My revision agreed that Slota had xenophobic statements and that he is misconductful. I cannot accept your views and I think there would be more people that wouldn't. Let us remember the four letters> NPOV. I am going to publish those statements so that everyone can make an opinion and change your revision BTW you didn't explain the thing about prejudice. I ask you once more for this, please, I saw this as a really bad formulation. Laddy P.S.: You can believe me, I am more critical about this party than you would guess.

Juro, I hope you're OK with the latest revision, please read it carefully and I hope you will agree that it is balanced. Laddy

And one more thing. I have the feeling that you view me as some kind of fanatic. It is perhaps partially my folt, if I look here sometimes in this way. I hope we will have the pleasure collaborating at more articles and you will see that there certainly are bigger radicals than me. It is in my nick that I am just a liberal (meaning moderate, and a very very moderate one) nationalist. This was just about your revision being really really bad. And to prevent edit wars, let's try to make a compromise, if you still don't agree with the revison. Anyway, I already made a big concession replacing the word "some" with "many" - about Slota's anti-Magyar expressions. I still want it to be expressed that the main aim of the statements is SMK. Simply to be correct. I have much more favourite people on the planet than the man this article is about. Laddy

Firstly, and I cannot "accept" the current spread of extremism and explicit lies in this wikipedia. Secondly, quotes like "the Magyars are ugly" or the Magyars have "crooked legs" are no xenophobic statements??? A much worse attribute would be appropriate actually. Thirdly, you are trying to hide the reality by a long pseudo-polemical talk. Everything can be relativized by a longer speech, that is not the point here. And most importantly, instead of wasting your time on only one or two articles you have written here and you have been fanatically supervising since, you should invest your in articles like Slovakization, Magyarisation etc., so that the guy there has an equal counterpart. Juro 11:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: And as for the tanks part. He did not have to "explain" how he meant it, because if you read the whole quote, he actually DID SAY it in the context that Slovakia is being attacked. Juro 11:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Juro, I´m almost satisfied with the revision. Almost. Still, there is the unbelievable sentence about extremely conservative prejudice. You still haven´t answered me, what that means. I simply cannot regard it in any way NPOV. Secondly, dear companion, why don´t you put the sentence with crooked legs you mentioned, to the text? That´s what I already challenged to. In my revison, I write it for the third time, I mentioned for example that his statements were misconductful and that some of his statements were xenophobic. This was just another example when you reacted more on your emotions than what was actually written. Go look at the older revisions and you will see what I actually wrote. I never wanted to depict Slota as an angel. About my work on Wikipedia - I work mostly at the Slovak one, on this just marginally. Don´t criticise my style of work, please, I don´t criticise yours. It is quite natural that I keep an eye on the articles that I created. Laddy

I have corrected the information on Slota in accordance with his website's information and my own memory (I refused to join a group of consuls general who called on him in 1991). Paul

NPOV

[edit]

"He has repeatedly made and makes xenophobic, nationalist, abusive statements about the Party of the Hungarian Coalition (the party of the Hungarian minority in Slovakia), and Hungarians in general. He also strongly abuses in his speeches the Roma and homosexuals, although Slota says he is only against alleged homosexual propaganda. In a speech given in 1999 at a HZDS rally on March 5 1999, Slota (obviously drunk) said,"

This paragraph needs to be rewritten to the point where it returns this entry to an encyclopedia article rather than a political attack page. Furthermore, there are quotations and criticisms elsewhere in the article that are unsourced.

Chubbles 10:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Chubbles 19:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, the comments are back with sources...but I can't help but see it as still sounding somewhat like an attack page. The page still seems to suffer from undue weight, but part of that might just be that the rest of the page is so short on information. Chubbles 15:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Slota's nationalistic (or even racist) opinions should be definitely noted in article. However I don't think the right way to do so is to list his controversial quotes; instead we should describe his nationalistic opinions in general (possibly in a fewer sentences than we currently do). Also, backing quotes by (mostly) Hungarian sources is a bit POVish. I could fix the article, however with my poor English I would probably screw the stuff up even more :-) Miko3k (talk) 23:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have just removed unsourced controversial material. I second your suggestion to rewrite the part about Slota's opinions, however very carefully and reliably sourced personal history is not out of question. --Ruziklan (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this article may have serious WP:BLP (Biographies of Living Persons) issues. You are free to become very aggressive about removing information which is not solidly sourced. I have added this page to my watchlist, and if you feel that you need more help with it, you may wish to post a report at WP:BLPN, the BLP Noticeboard. Many editors there are very familiar with BLP issues and can help offer uninvolved opinions. Also, since this article relies a great deal on non-English sources, we might want to insist on stricter adherence to WP:RSUE (Reliable sources - use English), which means that if a non-English source is used, that a quote and translation from that source must be included in the reference, to assist other editors with verifying the information. --Elonka 04:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The problem here is that as far as I know the content is all right. Quite naturally, controversial policians are subject to media attention, and this everything was covered by media in Slovakia, Hungary, Czechia and maybe somewhere else, quite widely, but not in English speaking world. As English language source The Slovak Spectator (published in Bratislava) is definitely an option - only someone should look it up. --Ruziklan (talk) 09:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article already has three English language sources, two of them from Der Spiegel, one of the most reliable (and in this case neutral) sources you can find. This is not bad for a short article like that. Squash Racket (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, and that is good. What I was thinking about, it was covering by English language source also points so far sourced in Slovak or Hungarian only. Slovak Spectator is one of the most serious Slovak newspapers and is in English, that is why I have recommended it to anyone wanting to find the source. But well, personally I see no further need to work here right now. :-) --Ruziklan (talk) 13:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It would probably be very helpful for someone to create a stub article on the Slovak Spectator (and other redlinks at List of newspapers in Slovakia) and link them via interwiki to any relevant articles in other language Wikipedias. That would help to establish which ones were most suitable as reliable sources. --Elonka 13:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from Talk:Trnava) Is there any green in my eye? "Invective" huh? Don't even think of trying to "play" like this, Ruziklan. You read, and was aware of them too, since the media was full with these that times, as well as now with his petty and not so petty crimes. --Rembaoud (talk) 05:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Four things:
1. You are out of topic here. The changes of Ján Slota article should be discussed on its talk page, not on page about Trnava. Why you bring this diff here?
2. Last word here to explain. I have removed that content not because it is not true, but because it is about living person, potentially libel and completely unsourced in the moment, thus per Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons. It is not my business to provide sources, you are free to do so and thank you for doing so.
3. If you do not understand, naming Ján Slota as Johnnyboy is invective, as simple as such.
4. Please, do not call my actions "playing" (with quotation marks), I am trying to adhere to all set rules and acting in a good faith.
I am copying these two replies also to Talk:Ján Slota, please, continue the discussion there if you wish. --Ruziklan (talk) 08:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also thanks to User:Squash Racket for further references. --Ruziklan (talk) 08:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute tag

[edit]

This article has now been tagged as having POV problems, for over a year. Are there still issues? If so, let's get them listed and dealt with. If not, let's remove the tag. --Elonka 23:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This aricle is just bad beyond possibility of repair imo. (actually I tried yesterday, but it turned to be hell of the job so I just closed my browser window:)). Everybody knows about Slota's racist stataments, however I don't think it's the reason to fill the article with them. Article misses some important achievements, especially in žilina (interestingly written article is here [1], maybe we could use parts of it), and describes unimportant accidents in great detail (I think there should be at most 3-4 sentences about his (possible) failures before '89). Also sources pretty much suck (we don't need to back a sentence about him being a chairman of SNS by long article of annoyed Hungarian human rights organization - of course we can source them, but on relevant places). Also I guess we should stick to English language sources for controversial material. I mean we can use Slovak language biography on information about family, siblings, etc but we should definitely refrain from linking to Slovak language newspaper articles describing his recent racist statements. After all, any politician says something bad from time to time. The problem is, however, Slota has never said anything good :) Miko3k (talk) 11:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you actually read the article, you will see a number of his racist statements are referenced by the English version of Der Spiegel. The Hungarian Human Rights Foundation is only a backup source for already well-referenced parts of the article (Der Spiegel). I wouldn't call his criminal past unimportant, he is still a political leader in the government of an EU member country. The most recent "unimportant accident" when someone else signed his name while he was missing from the Slovak Parliament is not even mentioned.
I don't think you'll find an English language source for everything, probably because he doesn't seem to be important/interesting enough for the English language media.
If you know about his positive achievements and can add sourced info, feel free to do so. Squash Racket (talk) 11:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you google for him, you will found source for most of his "jokes" (it seems to me it's actually only thing covered by english language media:)). Also, that's my point, we don't have to mention *everything*. We should just describe hit character in general (carefully not to go into original research) and pick the best covered examples. Also I definitely don't call someone signing in his name unimportant.
On the other hand, doing some minor crimes at age of 17 is (or belongs to section titled "early years" together with description of his activities before 1990). Same goes for giving order to start a fire. If you read the article you will see it wasn't actually so bad (damage was about 4000 CSk - about monthly salary that time and he was fined by -15% reduced salary for 10 months). Article don't mention this.
Also, when I was talking about HHRF I ment sources [1] and [2] because they are definitely negative but they are backing a simple non-controversial sentence about place of birth (also I'm not sure if they even mention the information). It's hard to find his biography in English but I'm suggesting we could use Slovak language sources for information like this. [Der Spiegel] is one of the best sources used in article (it's English, and not affiliated by Hungarians nor Slovaks) but it's but it's also known for being a magazine which likes to create scandals. But I like the way it's used: "According to Der Spiegel..." which is a good.
I'm generally suggesting we should try to be as "positive" as possible (and thus, have only half of article describing his evil side:)). Miko3k (talk) 16:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First you mention your problem is too many details, then you want to add even more. You may add missing information with reliable sources, you don't need others' permission.
Source number [2] is the Der Spiegel source. I guess switching from the English language HHRF source to a Slovak language one would definitely be a step backwards.
I don't think anything should be removed. If you think half of the article should be about the "angel side" of this far-right wing politician, then you should write that part and add reliable sources. Squash Racket (talk) 18:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the problem with [1] and [2] is: we have the sentence "Ján Slota (September 14, 1953 in Lietavská Lúčka) is the co-founder and President of the Slovak National Party (SNS)" and references are: 1) "Slovak Government Embraces Ultra-Nationalists, Excludes Hungarian Coalition Party" and 2) "Chaos, Corruption and Extremism - Political Crises Abound in Eastern Europe". I couldn't find place and date of birth in any of them. Having first sentence unsourced is better than purely bad references and Slovak reference is better than no reference :). Note that I'm suggesting non-english source only in specific cases of non-disputable and non-controversial content for which English sources do not exist (or I couldn't find them:)).
I don't want to add more details, it was just example of sentence missing important details. Also "plus 1 den" cannot be considered a reliable source, almost entire last paragraph is based on it.
What I want to do, is to remove irrelevant and poorly sourced stuff. Also material needs to be added to balance current purely negative tone. I don't want to add stuff about angel side (he doesn't even have one:)) but about his "normal" (human?) side. Also you're asking me to add properly sourced material but you object removing badly sourced one. Yes, he's far right but I guess we should stick to WP:BLP here. Miko3k (talk) 21:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References [1] and [2] reference his being a chairman of SNS and they are doing a perfect job at that. If you want to add a further reference for his birth date/place, feel free to do so without removing the other two English language ones.
If you think the Slovak source is unreliable, replace it with a reliable one. Or you think the article contains information that is not true? Please use tags first (as suggested by Elonka below) without removing anything. Exactly what do you see as "irrelevant"? Squash Racket (talk) 03:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One way to handle things, is to first start by identifying bad sources:
  • Any citation which is to a potentially unreliable source, please tag with {{vc}}
  • Any sentence that uses a reliable source, but does not correctly use information from that source, either fix it, or tag it with {{vs}}
  • Any (questionable) sentence that has no source, please tag with {{fact}}
--Elonka 22:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ján Slota. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 21:32, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ján Slota. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 00:54, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ján Slota. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 01:37, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ján Slota. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 14:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propagandistic tone

[edit]

Far be it from me to defend a far right ultranationalist, but a line needs to be drawn where criticism of slovakian ultranationalism ends and hungarian nationalist propaganda begins. The section under "controversial statements" is a detailed list of quotes, following a claim that his statements "have been described as racist" (this is WP:WEASEL) or that they "cross the line not just of political but also human decency". This isn't encyclopedic, this is some hungarian nationalist listing their greivances. His statements on hungarians are also given disproportionate weight compared to his statements of the roma minority - even though only the latter fits the academically accepted definition of racism - or members of the LGBTQ community. 46.97.170.32 (talk) 13:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ján_Slota&oldid=1202285781"