Jump to content

User talk:Boynamedsue

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Boynamedsue (talk | contribs) at 07:07, 28 February 2021 (→‎Mkucr talk page comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Trouble at Black Legend

Cateyed, on the second day of his editing here, decided to create The Black Legend, covering Spain, and to reduce the long-established Black Legend page to a rump. Before he got started Black Legend was nearly 34k raw bytes, he then expanded it up to nearly 62K, before removing the Spanish stuff and reducing it to under 10K. I haven't had time to to work through his changes, though it is clear his English will always need a basic check for grammar and spelling, and his additions seem to be reference-free. I didn't think this was acceptable without discussion, so for now I reverted back to a version before his big cut. This page gets over 300 views a day, and has always been somewhat of a target for problems. I haven't formed a view as to whether a generalized "black legend" page is needed, but if it is, I don't think Black Legend and The Black Legend are sufficiently distinct titles. Perhaps this should be resolved by a WP:RM discussion, but I'm asking for preliminary views at the BL talk page first, ideally from those who have looked through Cateyed's many additions, at BL and at the other article. You're one of the top editors, so I'm informing you. Johnbod (talk) 01:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Antonio Rivero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Dickson. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:39, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

You are making presumptions about the sources at my disposal and relying solely on one. Suffice to say I can back that up. WCMemail 14:55, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Wee Curry Monster Well instead of being cryptic, why don't you add it somewhere people can see. You know, in good faith, like? In wikipedia we can only go on what users actually link or cite not arcane knowledge they allude to. I'm not being funny here, I genuinely believe Dickson is not notable because of what is in the article and the sources I've seen. It's not an article of faith. Boynamedsue (talk) 15:01, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I drafted this some time ago, you may or may not find it helpful.

Contemporary accounts

Captain Onslow's report and orders are in the British Archive at Kew Gardens. Rear-Admiral Baker’s orders to Onslow, and several different versions of Onslow’s report on his visit to Port Louis, are in PRO Adm 1/2276, and in PRO FO 6 500, pp. 96 (orders), and 116-124 (Onslow’s report as sent to British chargé d’affaires Philip Gore in Buenos Aires; Onslow's orders were clear.


Onslow's report documents his efforts to persuade them to stay, many wanted to leave as the Falklands were a harsh place to live and the Gaucho's had not been paid since Vernet's departue in 1831.



Pinedo (An Argentine source)From Pinedo’s testimony at his trial later in 1833, AGN Sala VII, Legajo 60, p. 22: “… los habitantes que quisiesen voluntariamente quedan, que serian respetados ellos y sus propriedades como anteriormente…”) corroborates this:


I ask you to note that the two eye witness accounts corroborate.

The Complete Works of Charles Darwin online includes the diaries of both Charles Darwin and Captain Fitzroy. HMS Beagle visited the settlement in March 1833 and again the following year. In March 1833, Fitzroy documents his meeting with Matthew Brisbane, Vernet's deputy, who had returned to take charge of Vernet's business interests. Fitzroy also documents his efforts to persuade the settlers to continue in the islands. Both Darwin and Fitzroy document their meetings with the settlers supposedly expelled 3 months earlier.

Brisbane brought one Thomas Helsby who also kept a diary and documented the residents of Port Louis. Residents of Port Louis This pretty much co-incides with Pinedo's account in January 1833. All without exception members of Vernet's settlement.

There is also Thomas Helsby's accounts of the Gaucho murders, when disgruntled Gaucho's ran amok and murdered Vernet's representatives.

Neutral

Lowell S. Gustafson (7 April 1988). The Sovereignty Dispute Over the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands. Oxford University Press. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-19-504184-2. Retrieved 18 September 2012.


I place a great deal of emphasis on Gustafson as an American academic who has studied extensively in Argentina. The book received a lot of praise for its neutral approach to the subject matter.


Empahsis added

Julius Goebel (1927). The struggle for the Falkland Islands: a study in legal and diplomatic history. Yale university press. p. 456. Retrieved 18 September 2012.


Emphasis added

Mary Cawkell (1983). The Falkland story, 1592–1982. A. Nelson. p. 30. ISBN 978-0-904614-08-4. Retrieved 18 September 2012.



Gunter (1979)


Metford (1968)


Royle (1985)


Dickinson (1994)


Goebel (1927)


Cawkell (1983)


Destefani (1982)

David Tatham (2008). The Dictionary of Falklands Biography (Including South Georgia): From Discovery Up to 1981. D. Tatham. ISBN 978-0-9558985-0-1. Retrieved 18 September 2012.

Source for the British Government position

[1] The Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Source for the Argentine Government position

[2] Argentina’s Position on Different Aspects of the Question of the Malvinas Islands


Note specifically the claim made is that the settlers were ejected. Note also Gustafson above specifically rebuts this claim as many academic sources do.

Not to mention the schizophrenic nature of what Argentina claims.

[3]



On the one hand its claiming the settlers were expelled, in the same document it refers to the settlers left in the islands.

  • Boynamedsue, I really need you to stop referring to the Anderson case and that Clarin article. As an admin, I consider this a serious violation of WP:BLP, and below I will leave a templated note indicating just how serious this is on Wikipedia. If you need an article like that, with all of its implications (not to mention a picture of an ID, with all kinds of information), to prove a point about citizenship or whatever, then that point is not worth making. Please use more proper sources, from more reliable publications, without having to go into individual examples of living people. The BLP applies everywhere, including article talk pages and user talk pages, so please don't bring this up anywhere on Wikipedia anymore. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies. I will follow your advice regarding this case, given what has been posted on your talk page. I don't think I was doing anything that violated WP:BLP, and I would stress that no reference to any individual was ever entered in the article. It is also worth noting that EL Clarin is considered to be a reliable source on the Spanish wikipedia, and there is no reason not to think it should be here either. Boynamedsue (talk) 17:01, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It may well be that Clarin is accepted elsewhere, and it may well be that it is acceptable here. I was just struck by the picture of that ID--that seems to me to be a pretty blatant disregard for international standards of journalism. Be that as it may, the material is not appropriate here, at least that how it seems to me. It is possible that other administrators disagree with me, of course, and that is a matter that could be discussed, but speaking also as an editor, I would not accept such...legalistic? statements on naturalization etc. be based on such an article. I understand the matter is complicated, which I think is all the more reason to source it differently. Anyway, thanks--I appreciate your cooperation. Drmies (talk) 17:06, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Falkland Island citizenship

I don't think any future discussion will be productive.

Your position is that because the Malvinas are considered part of Argentina under its law and also their law recognizes jus soli, that people born in the Falklands are Argentinian by birth. Jus soli requires birth withing territory not just claimed by the state but under its control.

Also you continually confuse someone who is born a citizen with someone acquires a right to claim citizenship at birth. These are two entirely different things and we cannot use a source that claims one thing to support another.

If Argentina provides birthright citizenship to people born in the Malvinas or gives them an unconditional right to claim citizenship, then there should be legislation or an executive order showing this so that passport officers would know whether to issue passports. Failing that, there should be a conclusion legal opinion. In comparison, I can provide you with the legislation that proves people born in the Falklands are British citizens: The British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983. And I can also provide a history of their citizenship status as well as legislation that provides a right for people born in the Falklands who have not acquired citizenship to apply for it.

TFD (talk) 21:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Statements of Attila Lakatos

Attila Lakatos, the Roma Voivode of Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén County (inofficial historical title among the Roma community) approved and openly declared that gypsy criminality is an existing phenomenon: “Some type of crimes are connected to Roma primarily. Not exclusively, but mostly. It's undeniable."[1]

Attila Lakatos declared - by referring to the preceding incident, the manslaughter in Ózd - that there is no excuse for such crimes and approved Bayer's description.[2]

Boynamedsue (talk) 10:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Text deleted from Anti-Roma sentiment section

Anti-Roma attitudes and discrimination have existed continuously in Hungary since the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian empire, and these views have often been mirrored or encouraged by anti-Roma policies and rhetoric from political parties and several governments.[3] The 2019 Pew Research poll found that 61% of Hungarians held unfavorable views of Roma.[4] According to the Society for Threatened Peoples, the Roma are "consciously despised by the majority population," while anti-Roma attitudes are becoming more open.[5] A range of negative views of Roma are common among the majority population, research in 2011 showed that 60% of Hungarians feel Roma have criminality "in their blood" and 42% supported the right of bars to refuse to allow Roma to enter.[6]

In 2006, in the town of Olaszliszka, a schoolteacher was lynched by family members and neighbours of a Roma girl who he had hit with his car, the locals erroneously believing that the girl had been killed or seriously injured in the incident.[7][8][9][10] This crime was utilised by the extreme-right racist political party Jobbik to introduce anti-Roma discourse into the Hungarian media, characterising the murderers as a "gypsy mob" and demanding a solution to supposed "gypsy crime".[8][9][10][7] According to Feischmidt, this identification of gypsies with crime, which is not supported by statistical evidence, is fomented by new media accounts linked to the far-right, which leads to further racism, discrimination and violence against the Roma.[11] The "Gypsy Crime" narrative serves to present majority ethnic Hungarians as an in-group who are victims of an inherently criminal Roma out-group, serving the racist nationalist narrative of far-right groups.[8][9][10][7] The moral panic around so-called "gypsy crime" has been identified as a contributory factor to the very real racial violence suffered by Hungarian Roma, which police authorities frequently refuse to identify as hate crimes.[10][5][12]

Boynamedsue (talk) 10:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Text re Zsolt Bayer

In 2013, the governing Fidesz party refused to condemn the comments of their leading supporter Zsolt Bayer,[13][14] who wrote:

"a significant part of the Gypsies is unfit for coexistence... They are not fit to live among people. These Gypsies are animals, and they behave like animals... These animals shouldn’t be allowed to exist. In no way. That needs to be solved - immediately and regardless of the method."

[15]

However, some members of the party openly criticised the statement's style and form or condemned it as not suitable. Deputy Prime Minister Tibor Navracsics initially strongly criticised the statement, but later defended Bayer, suggesting that Bayer's comments were not his genuine opinion.[15] Fidesz communications chief Máté Kocsis was even more supportive of Bayer, saying critics of Bayer's article were "siding with" Roma murderers, even though nobody had been murdered in the attack to which Bayer had referred.[16] Later Bayer declared his words were taken out of context and misunderstood, as his goal was to stir up public opinion, but denied racial discrimination and reinforced he wish to segregate from the society only those Roma people who are "criminal" and "incapable and unfit for co-existence". The comments led to an advertising boycott of Bayer's Magyar Hírlap newspaper.[15][17]

Boynamedsue (talk) 04:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mkucr talk page comment

I moved your latest comment to be under the comment of mine you appear to be responding to, to avoid confusion. Hope you don't mind. AmateurEditor (talk) 09:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC) No problem at all, I agree it's a better place, thanks. Boynamedsue (talk) 10:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Roma Sentiment

Anti-Roma attitudes and discrimination have existed continuously in Hungary since the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian empire, and these views have often been mirrored or encouraged by anti-Roma policies and rhetoric from political parties and several governments.[3] The 2019 Pew Research poll found that 61% of Hungarians held unfavorable views of Roma.[18] According to the Society for Threatened Peoples, the Roma are "consciously despised by the majority population," while anti-Roma attitudes are becoming more open.[5] A range of negative views of Roma are common among the majority population, research in 2011 showed that 60% of Hungarians feel Roma have criminality "in their blood" and 42% supported the right of bars to refuse to allow Roma to enter.[19]

In 2006, in the town of Olaszliszka, a schoolteacher was lynched by family members and neighbours of a Roma girl who he had hit with his car, the locals erroneously believing that the girl had been killed or seriously injured in the incident.[7][8][9][10] This crime was utilised by the extreme-right racist political party Jobbik to introduce anti-Roma discourse into the Hungarian media, characterising the murderers as a "gypsy mob" and demanding a solution to supposed "gypsy crime".[8][9][10][7] According to Feischmidt, this identification of gypsies with crime, which is not supported by statistical evidence, is fomented by new media accounts linked to the far-right, which leads to further racism, discrimination and violence against the Roma.[11] The "Gypsy Crime" narrative serves to present majority ethnic Hungarians as an in-group who are victims of an inherently criminal Roma out-group, serving the racist nationalist narrative of far-right groups.[8][9][10][7] The moral panic around so-called "gypsy crime" has been identified as a contributory factor to the very real racial violence suffered by Hungarian Roma, which police authorities frequently refuse to identify as hate crimes.[10][5][12]

Members of mainstream Hungarian political parties have been accused nationally and internationally of having racist anti-Roma views and positions according to the prevailing standards in the EU.[15][20][21] The police chief of Miskolc, Albert Pásztor who was dismissed from his position and reassigned to another one after being accused of making anti-Roma statements, then reinstated following protests, was selected as joint mayoral candidate for the Hungarian Social Democrats and Democratic Coalition in 2014.[22] He declared that some type of crimes are only committed by Roma people and when challenged reiterated his views and claimed they were summarized from the local police reports. As the keeping of ethnic crime statistics contravenes Hungarian law, a representative from the Alliance of Free Democrats enquired as to whether Pásztor had compiled a private archive of crime statistics. Pásztor replied that his statements were not based on statistics, but on mentions of offender ethnicity in reports made by victims of crime.[23][24]

In 2013, Fidesz, the largest party in the governing coalition, refused to condemn the comments of their leading supporter Zsolt Bayer,[16][25][26][27][28][29] who wrote:

"a significant part of the Gypsies is unfit for coexistence... They are not fit to live among people. These Gypsies are animals, and they behave like animals... These animals shouldn’t be allowed to exist. In no way. That needs to be solved - immediately and regardless of the method."[15]

However, some members of the party openly criticised the statement's style and form or condemned it as not suitable. Deputy Prime Minister Tibor Navracsics initially strongly criticised the statement, but later defended Bayer, suggesting that Bayer's comments were not his genuine opinion.[15] Fidesz communications chief Máté Kocsis was even more supportive of Bayer, saying critics of Bayer's article were "siding with" Roma murderers, even though nobody had been murdered in the attack to which Bayer had referred.[16][30] Later Bayer declared his words were taken out of context and misunderstood, as his goal was to stir up public opinion, but denied racial discrimination and reinforced he wish to segregate from the society only those Roma people who are "criminal" and "incapable and unfit for co-existence". The comments led to an advertising boycott of Bayer's Magyar Hírlap newspaper.[15][31]

In 2013, Géza Jeszenszky, the ambassador to Norway provoked protests in Hungary and Norway due to statements in a textbook which suggested that Roma suffered from mental illness because "in Roma culture it is permitted for sisters and brothers or cousins to marry each other or just to have sexual intercourse with each other."[32][33] Jeszenszky claimed these declarations, which he claimed to be based on wikipedia, were not racist, and he received support from the Hungarian foreign ministry. Due to these comments, the Norwegian Institute of Holocaust and Religious Minorities asked Jeszenszky not to attend its International Wallenberg Symposium event.[15] Boynamedsue (talk) 07:07, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Szabados, Gábor (16 September 2008). "Interjú Lakatos Attila vajdával". boon.hu. Borsod Online.
  2. ^ "Farkas Flórián nem foglalkozik Bayer Zsolt kizárásával". atv.hu. ATV Zrt. 11 January 2013.
  3. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Guglielmo was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ "European Public Opinion Three Decades After the Fall of Communism — 6. Minority groups". Pew Research Center. 14 October 2019.
  5. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference IRBC was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ Bernat, Anna; et al. (2013). "The Roots of radicalism and anti-Roma Attitudes on the Far Right". Tarki.
  7. ^ a b c d e f Feischmidt, Margit; Szombati, Kristof; Szuhay, Peter (2014). Collective criminalization of the Roma in Central and Eastern Europe (In the Routledge Handbook of Criminology). Routledge. ISBN 9781136185496. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  8. ^ a b c d e f Vidra, Zsuszanna; Fox, Jon. "The Rise of the Extreme Right in Hungary and the Roma Question: The radicalization of media discourse" (PDF). Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  9. ^ a b c d e f Vidra, Z; Fox, J (2014). "Mainstreaming of Racist Anti-Roma Discourses in Hungary". Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies. 12 (34): 437–455. doi:10.1080/15562948.2014.914265. S2CID 144859547.
  10. ^ a b c d e f g h Cite error: The named reference AI was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  11. ^ a b Feischmidt 2014, p. 173.
  12. ^ a b O'Rorke, Bernard (2019). "Hungary: A timeline of killings, terror and collective punishment" (PDF). European Roma Rights Review (Winter): 13. Retrieved 5 September 2020.
  13. ^ Paula, Kennedy. "Hungarians return awards over 'racist' journalist". BBC. Retrieved 9 September 2020.
  14. ^ "Award for 'racist' journalist in Hungary sparks protests". The Guardian. Retrieved 9 September 2020.
  15. ^ a b c d e f g h O'Rorke, Bernard. "10 Things they said about Roma in Hungary". European Roma Rights Centre. Retrieved 9 September 2020.
  16. ^ a b c Der Spiegel. Blurring Boundaries: Hungarian Leader Adopts Policies of Far-Right
  17. ^ "Farkas Flórián nem foglalkozik Bayer Zsolt kizárásával". atv.hu. ATV Zrt. 11 January 2013.
  18. ^ "European Public Opinion Three Decades After the Fall of Communism — 6. Minority groups". Pew Research Center. 14 October 2019.
  19. ^ Bernat, Anna; et al. (2013). "The Roots of radicalism and anti-Roma Attitudes on the Far Right". Tarki.
  20. ^ "Hungary: Hundreds protest governing party over anti-Romani commentary". Romove on-line. Retrieved 9 September 2020.
  21. ^ Bhabha, Jacqueline; Matache, Margarita. "Anti-Roma hatred on the streets of Budapest". EU Observer. Retrieved 9 September 2020.
  22. ^ Toth, Csaba (7 July 2014). "MSZP and DK support candidacy of controversial former police chief for Miskolc mayor". The Budapest Beacon. Retrieved 5 September 2020.
  23. ^ uthor credit"Draskovics: erkölcsi döntés volt a miskolci rendőrkapitány áthelyezése". mti.hu. MTI. 31 January 2009. Archived from the original on 2009-02-03.
  24. ^ "Leváltották a cigányozó rendőrkapitányt". index.hu. INDEX. 30 January 2009.
  25. ^ Paula, Kennedy. "Hungarians return awards over 'racist' journalist". BBC. Retrieved 9 September 2020.
  26. ^ "Award for 'racist' journalist in Hungary sparks protests". The Guardian. Retrieved 9 September 2020.
  27. ^ "Bayer's anti-Roma rant draws fire". Hungarian Media Monitor. Center for Media and Communication Studies-University of Budapest. Retrieved 27 February 2021.
  28. ^ "Anger grows in Hungary over anti-Roma article". The Guardian. Retrieved 27 February 2021.
  29. ^ Ram, Melanie H. (2014). "Europeanized Hypocrisy: Roma Inclusion and Exclusion in Central and Eastern Europe". Journal on Minority Issues and Ethnopolitics in Europe. 13 (3): 15–44. Retrieved 27 February 2021.
  30. ^ Ram, Melanie H. (2014). "Europeanized Hypocrisy: Roma Inclusion and Exclusion in Central and Eastern Europe". Journal on Minority Issues and Ethnopolitics in Europe. 13 (3): 15–44. Retrieved 27 February 2021.
  31. ^ "Farkas Flórián nem foglalkozik Bayer Zsolt kizárásával". atv.hu. ATV Zrt. 11 January 2013.
  32. ^ Bogdan, Maria; Dunajeva, Jekatyerina; Junghaus, Tímea; Kóczé, Angéla; Rövid, Márton; Rostas ̧, Iulius; Ryder, Andrew; Szilvási, Marek; Taba, Marius. "Nothing about us without us: Roma participation in policy making and knowledge production- Chapter 1 "Introduction"" (PDF). Sussex Research Online. European Roma Rights Centre. p. 3. Retrieved 27 February 2021.
  33. ^ Nagy-Iulius Rostás, Beata (2013). "A Note on Roma Mental Health and The Statement By Geza Jeszenszky" (PDF). Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. 4 (2): 89–97. Retrieved 27 February 2021.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Boynamedsue&oldid=1009375431"