Talk:Stéphane Hessel

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

Merger proposal[edit]

I propose that Indignez-vous! Cry out! be merged into Stéphane Hessel. I think that the content in the Indignez-vous! article can easily be explained in the context of Stéphane Hessel, and the Hessel article is of a reasonable size in which the merging of Indignez-vous! will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Marrante (talk) 07:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Agree. Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 14:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm having second thoughts now. There's a recent NYT article about this booklet and there are already two Wikipedia sites in other languages about it. I may want to withdraw this proposed merger. Marrante (talk) 20:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
No support for the merger appeared on the booklet article talk page, plus new language translations keep being added. The booklet has been credited with spawning a protest movement in Spain. Currently, translations exist in English, German, Spanish, Italian, Dutch, Portuguese, Romanian and Greek. Translations are in the works for Slovenian, Korean, Japanese, Swedish and Chinese. Including the consensus from the booklet talk page), the consensus for the merger proposal is not to merge, so I am removing the template from the article, which I regret having added in the first place. Marrante (talk) 07:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Contribution to Universal Declaration of Human Rights[edit]

It seems we have an issue here. When I updated the article a few days ago, it stated in the introduction "He participated in the editing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948." This information is false, as clearly indicated on the very same article (same date): "After the war, Hessel was secretary to a committee involved in editing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948." It says nowhere that he participated in the editing of it. His participation is known to be inflated by media in France, who have built an unnecessary glory around Hessel, who did not need that to build his reputation. Noticing the mistake, I fixed it [1], mentioning as a reference in the history this article from the French newspaper Le Monde: [2].

Now we have a very zealous IP address who thought that the article was still wrong (cf history comments), and added the text:

"After the war, Hessel became assistant to Henri Laugier, vice-secretary general of the United Nations in charge of economic and social affairs but was not involved in the Declaration of Human Rights as falsely printed in a lot of books and articles."

Giving the very same article from Le Monde as a reference. A first issue we have is that the reference does not mention any book ("lot of books" being very wrong), and does not say if the media propagating the wrong information are purely limited to French press or TV or if it is a worldwide phenomenon. Is it really worth mentioning all this? Is Wikipedia meant to list all factual errors, or just to present simply true facts? I believe the article should not contain this sentence, and was just fine before the update.

Additionally, when I fixed the article, I replaced the statement on Hessel's contribution by the fact that he was just a "privileged witness". The article in Le Monde gives a quote from Hessel saying: "I have witnessed the creation of it very closely and from the beginning to the end." This is considered true. I believe "privileged witness" is a fair depiction of this statement and respects NPOV.

It seems the IP insists on having these updates, and as a human being, I am very capable of making mistakes, so I bring the debate here under the eyes of the community. Thanks for your help, I'll gladly stand corrected. Vincent Lextrait (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, did not notice it earlier here. here a quick link to see that the wrong information is spread around in books

https://www.google.be/#q=hessel+d%C3%A9claration+universelle+des+droits+de+l%27homme&hl=fr&source=lnms&tbm=bks&sa=X&ei=-DQ5UanpN4X6PIfegcgB&ved=0CAsQ_AUoAQ&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.43287494,d.d2k&fp=7ae0d89789c19bb4&biw=1024&bih=612 Zealous but for facts an truth 94.108.112.106 (talk) 00:51, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

newspapers http://www.abc.es/cultura/libros/20130227/abci-muere-stephane-hessel-padre-201302270944.html

Fue uno de los testigos y animadores que contribuyeron a redactar la Carta universal de los derechos del hombre de Naciones Unidas.

http://portfolio.lesoir.be/v/video/DUDH/wmk_xcMGau.html Rencontre avec Stéphane Hessel, qui a participé à la rédaction de la DUDH

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/27/stephane-hessel-fought-injustice-great-life he embarked on a career in diplomacy at the UN, where he took part in the drafting of the universal declaration of human rights.

I think it is important to keep the full sentence to avoid that other participants to wikipedia, not fluent in French could be faced with several wrong articles in the press about his "role" and would like to correct based on wrong information. What do you think? 94.108.112.106 (talk) 01:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

The extent of this wrong information is news to me, sorry, I didn't know. But I still believe wikipedia is not meant to list all wrong information, otherwise we need four times the space it has today, and it'll become bloated. Just the right information, period. Vincent Lextrait (talk) 07:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
I would agree totally in general, but as you can already have a flair of that extent by the few links, this misinformation becomes itself encyclopedic information. May be we need som other opinion or examples of similar cases (the SamBacile affair is the most recent that comes to my mind)

94.108.112.106 (talk) 08:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Can you, please, stop adding this op-ed and stop deleting without any real justification a link to an actual explanation of his role on the website of the United Nations? This last reference is more reliable and more accurate. We don't need a personal opinion about the portrayal of Hessel in the medias. Beyond this question of sources, I don't really understand (and I don't think that the ordinary reader will understand) what involved in the Declaration of Human Rights exactly means... Eleventh1 (talk) 09:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
do you know the rules that wikipedia prefers secondary sources to primary as yours. So you should put the link to Le Monde again 94.108.112.106 (talk) 10:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)