Talk:George Papandreou

[query]
??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.185.209.23 (talk) 10:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

 * Talk:George Papandreou, junior

from User talk:Optim:

How does the Greek media differentiate between the two George Papandreous? Using "junior" and "senior" as we've done? --Jiang 09:26, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * There are many ways to distinguish them. One way is the use of the word αείμνηστος (aimnistos) which means unforgettable or ever-memorable, for George Papandreou, senior. Of course only people who support him use this word and surely it is not NPOV! Another way is the middle name. One more way is the careful use of the forms of the name George, one is "Georgios" and the other is "Giorgos". It would be innapropriate to use "Giorgos" for the senior Papandreou. But we use both names for the junior Papandreou. For the junior the word "Νεώτερος" (neoteros) meaning junior may also be used. So we may say "Georgios Papandreou o neoteros". The opposite is Gireoteros (Γηρεότερος) which means senior but not very common. For an encyclopedia it is better to use the full name (first + middle + last name). I don't know the middle name of George senior, unfortunately. I think these pages are maintained mainly by Adam, so let him free to use whatever seems appropriate for him. I also keep an eye on these pages so if I see some mistake I will correct, so do not worry :) Optim 16:35, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware that the two George Papandreous spelled George differently in Greek. How can this be? Surely the name is Georgos since the first syllable is &Gamma;&epsilon;, earth. Adam 00:32, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * The formal and "right" name is Georgios, for both Papandreous. However, in Modern Greek, the people very often say Giorgos to mean Georgios. Just like my name, my name is Nikolaos but usually Nikos is used instead of Nikolaos. Also for Konstantinos, we use Kostas. There are also some cultural usages of the names. For example, if someone is old we may prefer the traditional form of the name (Georgios/Nikolaos/Konstantinos). If someone is young we may prefer the modern form of the name (Giorgos/Nikos/Kostas). So it is possible to differentiate the two Papandreous by using carefully this feature: you can say Georgios for the senior and Giorgos for the junior. Of course this is more or less informal and must not be used in Wikipedia. Also usually we use the traditional form of a name (Georgios) when we want to emphasise the respect we have for someone. It would be innapropriate to use the modern form of a name for someone who is highly respected expect if he/she prefers to be called that way or we talk informally. (however these guidelines are not written in stone, these are based on my culture and my background, so don't get surprised if you see a Greek saying that the form of the name doesn't matter). Also, for Konstantinos Karamanlis the senior it is preferred to use Konstantinos and never Kostas. For Kostas Karamanlis the junior we usually use Kostas. So we differentiate between the two Karamanlis's using their first names: The modern name for the junior and the traditional name for the senior. All modern names are informal, since during birth all Greeks receive only traditional names. For an encyclopedia I think the best way to differentiate is to use the middle name. Optim 00:50, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

That is very enlightening, efharisto poli. But the policy is that people should be called by their most common names in English, so that both Papandreous have to be called George Papandreou. I think the current method of disambiguating them is as good as any other and I don't see any reason to change it. I agree that the two Caramanlises should be called Constantine and Costas respectively. I think the spelling of Greek names with a "C" is still more common in English than with a "K", though this is changing. Adam 01:32, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * No it is not needed to change the current naming scheme. For Wikipedia with the current policy it is very fine to have George Papandreou, senior and George Papandreou, junior. I expressed my personal opinion on how an encyclopedia should be categorised, but I have no problem with the current Wikipedia policy. And for the C/K, as far as I know, English people regard K as foreign and they consider C as more English-like, so it is better to use C for now. I have also asked this question on IRC Wikipedia Channel and they told me that C is better usually, so I prefer it. Optim 01:47, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the info Optim.

I did a google search of "George Papandreou" and as far as I checked (up to the 5th page) all the English pages (except for the WP article) referred to the foreign minister. So ,currently (in the English media), "George Papandreou" almost always refers to the younger one, just like how "George Bush" no longer refers to the elder. We should move [George Papandreou, junior] here, leave the senior article where it is (or insert a middle initial) and add a disambiguation on top of here. --Jiang 04:44, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with this, and I think it may help so that we will not have to type ",junior" whenever we need to link to Papandreou. Agreed. Optim 04:59, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Done. --Jiang

Dynasty
Aquarel, I agree with most of your rvt. Just one point, please explain why you reverted the bit about the Papandreou family as a dynasty. They have been in political power, from father to son, since the 1930s. We have, George Papandreou, Andreas Papandreou, George Papandreou, Andreas Papandreou (the youngest member of the dynasty and entering politics). This is what makes people refer to them either as, George I, Anderas II, George II, and Andreas II, or even Papandreou I, Papandreou II, Papandreou III and Papandreou IV. In America it happens all the time when the same name is transmited from father to son.
 * In fact when George Papandreou (II) took over the leadership of Pasok, one Greek TV commentator said, 'Here is Georgakis, who has become Georgos and will soon become Georgios'; in English it translates as 'Here is little George, who has become George and will soon become His Majesty George'. Politis 12:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion for merge/modification
There are only two George Papandreou. It's better if redirect this article to junior and have a "see also" for the senior. The latter in Greek is Georgios so most people write Georgios Papandreou for him and not George. -- Magioladitis 12:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Wrong article title
Clearly there exists no "George Andreas Papandreou". His name is George Papandreou only. His father's name was Andreas but that is completely irrelevant.--   Avg     01:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Note that in Greece it is customary to use fathers name as middle name for men.So the Andreas Georgiou Papandreou is the correct ,formatted in the traditional way — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgesoilis (talk • contribs) 02:35, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Article becoming a PR job
This article is becoming a publicity page for its subject. References considered unfavourable are being deleted. Politis (talk) 16:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I second that. Even refferences to outside sources are used as leads in order to elliminate them. StevenK71 (talk) 07:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Removed POV statement
I removed the following text from the article: "He is considered utterly responsible for the party's defeat in 2004 and he will probably lead the party to another defeat in 2011. His replacement is expected not after 2010". Obviously not NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.74.63.168 (talk) 00:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, the whole Criticism paragraph is a mess. "the larger party was inactive due to Papandreou's failure to force his leadership on his party members", "he mistakenly expelled", "Evangelos Venizelos, arguably the most experienced and intelligent PA.SO.K. membee [sic]", "due to his inertia". All this is original research at best, and maybe even POV. I'll wait for someone to fix it, or I'll have a go at it (and god help us all). Just a clarification: I happen to agree with what that paragraph states as it is now, but Wikipedia isn't a site to post our opinions. Yrrolock (talk) 23:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Critisism
Ill just highlight what I believe is POV.

Papandreou's appointment as leader of PASOK in 2004 was hailed with great enthusiasm from the public(??). He was one of the most popular socialist politicians and was not blamed for the party's defeat in the 2004 elections after almost 20 years in government. However, shortly after the election, faced with intense internal opposition from party cadres, George Papandreou struggled to implement reforms aimed at making PASOK a more transparent, accountable, and open political movement. A seasoned and skilful diplomat in the international arena, Papandreou was initially less comfortable in the role of opposition leader. Eventually, Papandreou was forced to expel from PASOK several politicians who refused to tow the party line and openly disputed his leadership, a decision that was controversial. The party's defeat in the 2007 election caused the voters of PASOK to '''wrongly put the blame exclusively on Papandreou's new style of leadership''', rather than on the whole party. However Papandreou didn't give up hope and in November 2007 PASOK supporters were asked to vote for the party's leader. Papandreou's main rival, Evangelos Venizelos, arguably one of the most experienced and intelligent PASOK members, initially '''had considerable support both from the media and the public'''. But he lost the leadership challenge, and Papandreou was once again appointed leader of the party. He retains that position to this day. Unfortunately(WTF??), his thoughts and ideas about important foreign issues [2] and his progressive social-democratic beliefs [3] are not widely known among the Greek people.

I would just delete it but some grouppie will reverse it, someone please rewrite this.

Update Needed!
Article needs update for the 4th october elections. I added the banner.

Article name
Shouldn't this be moved to George Papandreou, Jr. - the correct format for relatives with the same name...?GiantSnowman 19:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * For Greek names, the Jr or Sr is not used, so his name is simply "George Papandreou". The (junior) is there for disambiguation. Constantine  ✍  20:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

We could move it to George Papandreou II, Politis (talk) 13:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, if the dynastic trend in Greek politics continues, we'll be forced to... :P Constantine  ✍  20:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

American national
Here's a thought. Right after his election as PM (ie last time I checked here), the infobox clearly stated his having two nationalities: Greek and American (I assume the second jus soli). Now, the nationality information from the infobox is rather conspicuously missing. What's the deal with that? By the way, lemme just note, his having an American nationality is one of the few positive things about him in my oppinion :P I just wonder why the info was removed? Druworos (talk) 12:46, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Seriously, is the guy stateless? There should be a nationality (or two) in the infobox for godssakes. Druworos (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Stateless it is, then. Druworos (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I was very tempted to just add stateless to the infobox (for the lulz), but I eventually just added back the two nationalities originally listed. I hardly think they need to be referenced: he is evidently Greek as he holds elected office, and evidently American by being born on US soil (jus soli does that for ya). If someone cares to remove the American nationality, the burden of proof would of course be on them, to prove that Mr. Papandreou actually renounced his US nationality. Druworos (talk) 20:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

From the US Department of State http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html

Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481) states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include: ... 4. accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) an oath or declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA); ....

So the way I understand this is that he no longer has US citizenship. I won't remove the American reference since I have not posted here before and don't wish to step on anyone's toes. But in the absence of confirmation of his citizenship I think he must be considered as only a Greek national Xenographos (talk) 16:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm no jurist, but the quote above says "if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship." The intention has not been particularly demonstrated, as far as I know. I would presume that such things would be a matter of public record, so if one is really keen, one could try asking the actual US authorities. Now, if one were a jurist, and they were to state that in their expert oppinion, Mr. Papandreou has renounced his citizenship by mere fact of taking an oath of allegiance, even if he has not particularly demonstrated an intention to renounce his citizenship by doing so, that is all I would need. At any rate, I have no particular intent to prove his Americanness, it just struck me as odd that ALL nationality info had been removed (including Greek). So, at any rate, my own view is that unless someone qualified to make such a judgement actually judges that he renounced his citizenship automatically, and without displaying such an intention, or unless someone proves that he actually displayed such an intention, the info should stay in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Druworos (talk • contribs) 18:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I have plenty of experience with US nationality issues and at present the US state department will always inquire as to one's intention before denying you a US passport. As long as Papandreou says that he took an oath but had no intention to relinquish US citizenship, his citizenship is intact. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence to point to the fact that Papandreou was a US citizen until after the 1980's - the fact that his son who is born in Greece carries a US passport and information about him provided in a bio written by his ex-spouse, which states that Papandreou went to the US embassy in London to renew his passport to ensure his passport renewal would be discrete and private. It's worth noting that as a US citizen, Papandreou has all responsibilities that come with US citizenship, including having no diplomatic immunity when in the US, having to file an annual federal tax return, having to follow federal laws that prohibit committing treason against the US, and having to use a US passport to enter the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.209.169 (talk) 02:17, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

As Druworos correctly stated, he is a US national by virtue of being born in the US. If someone cares to remove the US nationality, the burden of proof would of course be on them, to prove that Mr. Papandreou actually renounced his US nationality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreamercon (talk • contribs) 18:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Probably it is true but it is not 100% certain. As such it is original research to include it in an encyclopedia which deals only in 100% verifiable facts and not in speculation. When uncertain, especially in biographies of living people, we also have WP:BLP which clearly states that contentious or doubtful material must be removed. So I removed it until we get a reliable source which verifies the second nationality. Dr.K. λogosπraxis  23:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

It is verifiable that Papandreou was born a US citizen by virtue of being born in the US. It is also verifiable that once you have US citizenship, you don't lose it unless you take proactive steps to do so. There is no evidence that Papandreou has taken any of these steps. To the contrary, I have personal knowledge that his son is a US citizen by virtue of having a US citizen parent that satisfied the statutory requirements when born. Hence, it is more likely than not that Papandreou is a US citizen.

Nothing is 100% certain. In fact, you can't even be sure that a person is still alive at any given moment - but, absent evidence of death, you presume they are alive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.127.75 (talk) 20:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * What you are saying may be correct. But in the absence of a reliable source verifying this, it is just speculation and synthesis. Putting facts together, even if individually true, to reach a conclusion is exactly what WP:SYNTH is. If this fact is so obvious there should be a reliable source (WP:RS) out there which verifies it (WP:V). If not, we are engaging in original research WP:OR and synthesis. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 20:10, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Geoffrey / Jeffrey
I have deleted the statement that he was born "Geoffrey Papandreou", even though a Greek-language source is given for it. It is inconceivable that Andreas Papandreou would have given his son a non-Greek name. Greek convention is that the eldest son is named for the paternal grandfather. George senior was still very much alive in 1952, and it would have been a gross insult for Andreas not to name his eldest son after such a distinguished father, particularly in a family as dynastic as the Papandreous. I don't know the identity of the Greek writer who is given as the source of this statement, but I'm prepared to bet he is a right-wing commentator, since this is typical of the xenophobic attacks to which the Papandreous are regular subjected. (George senior's wife was Polish, and George junior's mother is American.) Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 11:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I was initially just as sceptical as you. Now, I don't actually have access to the book. But I did look up the newspaper article, and, let me assure you, it is neither fringe, nor even right-wing. It is published in "To Vima", a sister newspaper to the staunchly pro-PASOK "Ta Nea". "To Vima" is co-owned by "Ta Nea"'s owner, the Lambrakis group. Thus, seeing as it was published in a thoroughly pro-PASOK environment, I was very reluctant to remove it. Not sure if you can read Greek (no offence here, just that it isn't evident from your comment), but the article reads nothing like right-wing. In fact, it reads entirely like something a disgruntled PASOK supporter might write. I am reluctant to revert your edit, as I do feel that the sourcing is inadequate. It seems to me that, at the heart of this, is probably the practice that George Papandreou was not baptised at a very young age, as is Greek custom. By Greek social conventions (especially of that time) an unbaptised child doesn't even properly have a name, at all. So, if he was baptised "George" briefly before repatriation (as is stated) to a casual Greek observer it might seem that he was only named George at that point. Couple this with a quite imagineable practice of calling the young boy "Geoffrey" as an alternative Anglicisation of "Georgios", and you could very well have the situation at hand. As I said, I was very reluctant to remove the comment, as it was published in a pro-PASOK newspaper, and, apparently, a book. I'm also very reluctant to revert your edit, as I have no access to the book (nor can I vouch for its validity), and the newspaper article does very much adopt a xenophobic tone - although not a "right-wing" xenophobic tone, but a PASOK xenophobic tone. Xenophobia and nationalism are pervasive all across the traditional right-to-left spectrum in Greece, unfortunately. George's late father Andreas indulged the Greeks' nationalism more than a bit himself, as you might know.


 * So, summing up, I neither support nor oppose your removal of the comment, but I do hope to shed some more light on the premises of it. I do not intend to revert your edit, but I do feel that your edit may have been ill-considered, as you based it on the assumption that the publication was "right-wing propaganda". I can assure you that that is not the case. So, you may like to re-evaluate your position (though not necessary alter it, of course). Druworos (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I do read some Greek, but not enough to read the article easily. I accept the points you make, but I think we need to see some more evidence before accepting this claim. I will need to see very convincing evidence before I believe that Andreas Papandreou would name his eldest son "Geoffrey", and not after his father, a former Prime Minister. "George" is the usual anglicisation of "Georgios," not "Geoffrey." It's a name that would strike Greeks as very foreign and rather silly, and I think it is just unconceivable that a family such as the Papandreous would use it to name an eldest son. It may be that it was used as a childhood nickname in America, but even for that I'd want to see a source. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Druworos (talk) 18:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The "Minnesota. Minnesota Birth Index, 1935-2002. Minneapolis, MN, USA: Minnesota Department of Health" records indicate that there was a birth with FIRST Name George and LAST name Papandreou at St. Paul, Minessota in 1952 from father Andreas and mother Margaret. His SECOND name was Jeffrey (Dual names are not all that rare in Greece). As I am a native Greek speaker, I can confirm that the article in the Greek newspaper is from "non-conservative" media, but at a period that those media were preparing their bargaining tools for the elections to come for the then probable next prime minister. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.46.41 (talk) 01:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

George Jeffrey Papandreou is the name that appears in the Minessota Birth Index. His father *was* George Papandreou. Please do not weasel your POV by unsupported claims that ancestry.com is a "wrong or unreliable record"! Removing his middle name "Jeffrey" would be tantamount to editing "Hussein" out of the Wiki article on Barack Obama! Rastapopoulos (talk)


 * I think "young George" (Georgaki) will be surpriced to learn that his father was George. He seems to believe (like most of us) that he is the son of the late Greek PM Andreas Papandreou and the grandson of Georgios Papandreou. (Do not tell him now, he has enough on his mind.)
 * I have no idea whether the source is reliable, but I find it strange that it does not have the mother's name, nor any year of birth.
 * If the source is reliable, it must simply be a case of mistaken identity. You have got the wrong Jeffrey. I remove the name until a better source is found. 79.160.40.10 (talk) 12:33, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * With better search criteria for ancestry.com, the source suddenly appears better. Jeffrey is back! 79.160.40.10 (talk) 18:03, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Ancestry.com is a primary source. Since noone is calling him Jeffrey except blogs and his political opponents for political gain, per WP:BLP and WP:UNDUE I removed this information. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 20:44, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Ancestry.com is not a primary source, it uses the Minnesota Department of Health website as a source. At the latter site (http://www.health.state.mn.us/), you can purchase a copy of George Jeffrey Papandreou's birth certificate provided you are a relative of Papandreou, or a lawyer. If you sign up with with ancestry.com, it provides you more information including the exact father's and mother's name. Here is a screencap: http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/8670/jeffreyq.jpg Rastapopoulos (talk)

As an observation, I have the feeling that Papandreou 'greekness' is aimed by some editors. The fact that he was named 'Jeffrey' is stressed twice in the Early Life section, and also in the Personal Life section there is the 'One of his paternal grandgrandfathers was of Polish descent'. These appeared, I think from the same editor, with the addition that 'he learned Greek after moving to Greece, and it is not his native language'. On the overall they sound more like 'accusation' than information. Hope I'm wrong. Trek qo (talk) 04:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * You're not wrong, this is frequently the case. Another example includes the ersatz surname Glücksburg arbitrarily attributed to Constantine II of Greece in an attempt to question his "greekness." Papandreou is not more or less Greek than Constantine, or any other Greek citizen for that matter. However, would preemptive anti-xenophobia justify expunging Papandreou's middle name as it appears in his birth certificate? Not any more than it would justify hiding information on Obama's middle name. Rastapopoulos (talk) 08:09, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Good point and I agree. Anyway since his mother is American and he was born in the States, I think it's understandable he was also named Jeffrey. Anyway I hope people were trying to make a point along with the other edits about his 'greekness' because they felt somehow 'betrayed' by him (a foreigner that doesn't defend Greece's interests), and not because of xenophobia. Thanks for clarifying! Trek qo (talk) 11:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

military service
I remover the statement that "Unlike other Greek male conscripts, he never had to carry out his obligatory service in the Greek military forces."

This is false. The truth is George Papandreou server his military service in 1978 - 1979. Source: http://www.espressonews.gr/default.asp?pid=79&catid=16&artID=684538 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.205.227.18 (talk) 16:02, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Panousis said on his radio show he was called Jeffrey when he was growing up in America
is it true, sources? --194.219.142.55 (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

He was christened Jeffrey and changed his name to George when he decided on a political career in Greece, at 22. Since you cannot be christened twice, his real name is Jeffrey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.226.214 (talk) 20:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The word is not Anglicized. This is insulting.
They have a common root. It's the English form of the word, it's not an English word that was taken and converted. --195.74.255.109 (talk) 03:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

(George) --195.74.255.109 (talk) 03:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Geórgios Papandréou (senior) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 16:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Georgios Papandreou which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 18:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Attribution note
The previous version of the article (and its page history) before Geórgios Papandréou was moved to this target can be found at Talk:George Papandreou/old. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:48, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Writing Of The Name
Is the writing of "Γεώργιος" as "George" true?

Both may be from the same roots, (as many names from different languages) but when pronouncing there's no relation with each other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.255.247.79 (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

There are many ways you can write it. It all depends on which part of Greece you are from sometimes.--Comppro (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

whatever way you pronounce it in greek ther s no resemblance to the george sound,in any version.yiorgos,yeorgios,yiorgis.

Another issue i d like to address but i not sure how to start anew talk. There ois now september 2011 evidence of papandreou lying about the knowledge of greek debt preelection.He used the slogan "money exists" to convince that he will raise salaries and pensions when he comes to power.Recent discoveries of videos of the head of IMF saying that papandreou and all the politicians in greece knew about the debt levels.and misguided greeks and europeans on purpose.The target was to bring IMF in Greece.PASOK and papandreou acted in a traitor manner ,hiding all truth from greeks and trying to implement measures under the cover of the debt crisis.Things like selling all public service companies to multinational corporations are in the plan the political world of greece and the international capitalists are after .and they want them cheao ,thus explaining all the discrediting by Papandreou post election of the greeks ,with statements like :We in Greece are all corrupt,created a psychological condition that allowed the speculators to take over and impose measures that have bnever been seen before anywhere in the world. To cut the story short ,keeping in my opinion the article locked ,you only serve the purpose of these traitors,who try to hide the truth even today from the people of Greece and the world. I d advise more caution if you are really independant.

Reasearch if you re for real ,the new findings that the statistical authority was falsifying statistics about the debt ,making it seem higher than what it really was,in order to then present as their making and achievement the drastic reduction they could present by rearranging the numbers afterwards. Also it is now clear that he came to power under false pretences by lying about the economy and promising raise of salaries and pensions. and all was done under the direct orders of ministers of PASOK of mr.Papandreou,so he has the final responsibillity as prime minister along with his goverment. Yesterday the secretary of the authority that was send away for refusing to participate in this game,made public announcements ,that were not denied by the goverment.Instead PASOK is trying to silence any oposition voices and any critisism,by using means that resemble more a dictatorship rather than Greek democracy .(Police violence unprovoked against any demonstration for example) there is an omerta of silence in the media in greece ,since they are all funded by politicians or friends of politicians.they control completelly the information.And one hopes that internet will remain our refuge and our source of true information that are not misleading...:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgesoilis (talk • contribs) 03:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Broken link
The personal blog link is broken - will be removed if verified as not working. Mikebar (talk) 21:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Global Commission on Drug Policy
He ist also a member of the lobal Commission on Drug Policy http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Commission and the ony activ politician there — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.90.11 (talk) 14:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Provisional, interim, emergency or national unity government?
How is the new government formation called? seems everyone edits differently on that. shouldn't there be a separate page for that? Trek qo (talk) 12:51, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * As it doesn't exist, does it matter what you call it? When/if they announce it, then you will know the name. Personally, I doubt that this coalition government will happen -- more likely, ND will opt out and it will be a technocrat emergency government with Pap. trying to manipulate everything, as he always does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.226.214 (talk) 20:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Is still prime minister
George Papandreou is still prime minister. He has not resigned. He gave a televised address to the nation this evening, in which he alluded to departing from office, but did not state that he was resigning nor did he submit his resignation to the cabinet or the president. The country's two major English-language newspapers are still referring to him by his title, that of prime minister:


 * Athens News, November 10: clearly refers to Papandreou as prime minister. Earlier article states that he did not state his resignation during the televised address.
 * Kathimerini, in an an article filed shortly before midnight on November 9: "A meeting between President Karolos Papoulias, Prime Minister George Papandreou and conservative New Democracy leader Antonis Samaras yesterday afternoon - where the outgoing premier was expected to submit his resignation and pave the way for the announcement of a successor - was cut short after reports that the two main party leaders were still at loggerheads over who should lead an interim government. The three men are to meet again at 10 a.m. on Thursday, when it is hoped the deadlock will finally be broken.

We should wait until he hands in his resignation formally.--Damac (talk) 23:17, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Personal life
Recently there was a buzz in the Greek blogosphere about the writings of George Papandreou ex-wife Evanthia Zisimides, in a recently re-discovered 1988 autobiographical book. The book is out of print, and i've heard that there is an effort to remove it from circulation. From what I've heard about the contents in various postings propose the following paragraph to be added to the "Personal Life" section:

According to Evanthia Zissimides in her 1988 book 1"Eva Georgiou Papandreou reveals" Eva aided George Papandreou to get his academic degree by writing his thesis, while they were married. When the couple returned to Greece afterwards, Eva found out at a family dinner that George Papandreou had kept their marriage secret even from his close family. Soon after giving birth, the marriage was ended. Eva describes Papandreou as "an individualist, motivated only by self-interest with no real feelings at all".

Can anyone that has actually read the book confirm the contents? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StevenK71 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Name
What does the "A." in his name stand for? Is it "Andreas"? --Oddeivind (talk) 22:48, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 22:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well.. It means "Andrea" (without the s), as it is not he's middle name rather his paternal name. It is a common practice in Greek naming to use the "son of" between the christian name and the surname. Yeomos (talk) 11:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Early life
Is Papandreou the only politician in the world to have had no life before entering politics? When I last worked on this article there was a full section on his early life. Now it has gone, leaving this article severely deficient. Are there really no verifiable facts about his early life? Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 06:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Current reputation of G. Papandreou in Greece
In reading the entry I realized that it is does not give a clue about the reputation that Mr Papandreou enjoys in Greece nowadays. As such, I deemed the inclusion of a couple of sentences as quite necessary for the accuracy of the article. In addition, although the fact that Papandreou enjoys a bad reputation among contemporary Greeks is a truism for anybody living in Greece or familiar with Greek political life, I supplied a couple of references to back this up. Also, the opinion added in my contribution to the entry is not an expression of my personal views. It is a fairly accurate depiction of the widespread climate over Mr Papandreou. Last, I do not examine whether public opinion and germane critiques are fair or not. I only juxtapose an opinion whose existence is a crude matter of fact. Beyond that anybody is entitled to his/her own opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.85.49.182 (talk) 20:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Your edit reads as follows:
 * First the edit is full of vague terms and allegations. You say It should be noted None of your references says that. This expression is made up by you. This is called synthesis, WP:SYNTH. Second you wrote: is credited an important role in the breakdown of the Greek economy since the outbreak of the 2009 crisis. This is not found in any reference which you supplied. Third, the reference of "greek reporter.com" which you supplied includes the opinion of a Greek person who calls Papandreou a traitor. This is hardly balanced criticism. Finally the Fox news reference includes the opinions of two persons, one of whom says that Papandreou should teach people how to run economies into the ground. Again, a very flippant and unbalanced opinion. The opinion poll of enet which you supplied is just one opinion poll and polls change by the minute. Overall your information is flawed and not fit to be included in the article, especially at the lead. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  23:03, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * First the edit is full of vague terms and allegations. You say It should be noted None of your references says that. This expression is made up by you. This is called synthesis, WP:SYNTH. Second you wrote: is credited an important role in the breakdown of the Greek economy since the outbreak of the 2009 crisis. This is not found in any reference which you supplied. Third, the reference of "greek reporter.com" which you supplied includes the opinion of a Greek person who calls Papandreou a traitor. This is hardly balanced criticism. Finally the Fox news reference includes the opinions of two persons, one of whom says that Papandreou should teach people how to run economies into the ground. Again, a very flippant and unbalanced opinion. The opinion poll of enet which you supplied is just one opinion poll and polls change by the minute. Overall your information is flawed and not fit to be included in the article, especially at the lead. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  23:03, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Dear Dr K,

You may have your objections about the "it should be noted". However I read the WP: SYNTH and personally I cannot see any violation. Also you may have misunderstood this expression due to a probable failure to appreciate that this is a standard academic expression - and nothing more. That said, please feel free to change the expression if you remain unconvinced.

The 'role in the breakdown' is the subtext against which most (if not all) critiques are unfolded. As such I am afraid that your critique is pedantic. By the very same token one may even dispute the 'breakdown of the Greek economy' insinuation on the grounds that it is not verifiable by objective data or not stated formally by official resources, whatsoever.

The Fox.news and the greek reporter articles are opinions indeed, but i am afraid that it is your opinion that they are unbalanced. I may not support them but I see your critique of them as arbitrary. After all, reporter opinion is a Harvard Professor and I would thus suggest with much stronger epistemic authority and credence than any journalist, wikipedia contributor, blogger, politician etc. Having said that, please feel free to delete the Fox news reference if you still disagree.

Moreover given that I presume that you are familiar with the Greek political scene and the public life I would be sincerely surprised if you gathered that such assessments are the exception rather than the rule among contemporary Greeks. As aforementioned I do not say that they are correct or that I espouse them but that the majority of Greeks hold views that you may name unbalanced is a matter of fact. Thus, it is your reaction seems rather unbalanced. Also you may know that political scientists customarily document opinions of this type and publish them as empirical knowledge. The evaluative part is another phase of the research process.

On your point that polls change every minute, I am afraid that this is cheap critique, stemming from your abuse of an otherwise healthy mode of scepticism. To reply in your spirit, I demand references for this claim, otherwise it is your own opinion. Specifically, I demand meta-analyses proving that polls change as often as you say (And regardless the scientific backup that you may bring onto the table, basic epistemological scrutiny can easily cast doubt upon it - especially if one wishes to be rationalize a preset and dogmatic stance) Or, I guess that you could challenge the polls in case that you have reasonable grounds to doubt that the opinions in this poll should no longer hold. I dare to say that I would be surprised if I met a single Greek person to argue thus.

Overall I am tempted to suspect that behind your zeal to protect the Papandreou entry (from very basic information about undisputedly existing opinions that provide a more accurate picture about the current political atmosphere in Greece) there may be ideological issues at play. Sorry to say so, but I am afraid that Wikipedia is not the battlefield for advancing or protecting political agendas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oxon 1800 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * There is no probable failure to appreciate that this is a standard academic expression on my part, thank you very much. You must realise that this is not a conference where you present your academic paper. That would be original research on your part, please consult WP:OR. Everything you add here, including what you call "standard academic expressions" must be sourced to someone, other than yourself per our policies of verifiability WP:V and reliable sources WP:RS. I also note that you have a tendency for cheap personal attacks:
 * Please be advised that we have a policy against such tactics under our "no personal attacks" policy WP:NPA and our policy of assuming good faith WP:AGF. Furthermore we also have a policy for protecting living persons' biographies WP:BLP so your arguments:
 * Comments like basic epistemological scrutiny are simply original research on your part and nothing more. On Wikipedia you must supply references for anything you add, including basic epistemological scrutiny. If you want to add controversial material to this biography of a living person the burden is upon you to supply ironclad and unbiased facts and not snippets or flippant attacks from critics. Thus your comment:
 * is invalid. The professor has no built-in epistemic authority when he makes sarcastic remarks like "Papandreou should teach people how to run the economy into the ground". Let the good professor publish his academic paper proving that "Papandreou has run the Greek economy into the ground" in a recognised journal and if it gets accepted then we can consider including it here. Don't forget that on Wikipedia we are trying to build an encyclopaedia and not a collection of flippant remarks from people simply because we believe that they possess epistemic authority. I am surprised by your argumentum ad verecundiam because it defies proper academic scrutiny.
 * Finally, as I mentioned above, you made various personal attacks against me, including that I have a zeal to protect the Papandreou entry. First, I have to admit that I am surprised that such silly, suspicious and uninformed speculation about me originates from someone who presents him/herself as a neutral and deeply thinking academic. I would have expected a higher quality of academic discourse from someone who presents themselves as a scientist, rather than cheap potshots and mudslinging. But given that you resort to personal attacks against me in order to enter your original research into this article I submit that you are attached to your cause in a dialectically violent manner which indicates to me that you are not as neutral toward Papandreou as you present yourself to be. It also indicates to me that you need to improve your dialectic discourse by using logic to persuade your opponent and not try to subdue him by the use of written violence coated in an overdose of insincere passive-aggressive claptrap: Sorry to say so, but I am afraid that Wikipedia is not the battlefield for advancing or protecting political agendas. These concepts are simple and I would have expected any good academic to know them and practice them as a matter of routine academically ethical discourse. But apparently not. C'est la vie. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις  11:46, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comments like basic epistemological scrutiny are simply original research on your part and nothing more. On Wikipedia you must supply references for anything you add, including basic epistemological scrutiny. If you want to add controversial material to this biography of a living person the burden is upon you to supply ironclad and unbiased facts and not snippets or flippant attacks from critics. Thus your comment:
 * is invalid. The professor has no built-in epistemic authority when he makes sarcastic remarks like "Papandreou should teach people how to run the economy into the ground". Let the good professor publish his academic paper proving that "Papandreou has run the Greek economy into the ground" in a recognised journal and if it gets accepted then we can consider including it here. Don't forget that on Wikipedia we are trying to build an encyclopaedia and not a collection of flippant remarks from people simply because we believe that they possess epistemic authority. I am surprised by your argumentum ad verecundiam because it defies proper academic scrutiny.
 * Finally, as I mentioned above, you made various personal attacks against me, including that I have a zeal to protect the Papandreou entry. First, I have to admit that I am surprised that such silly, suspicious and uninformed speculation about me originates from someone who presents him/herself as a neutral and deeply thinking academic. I would have expected a higher quality of academic discourse from someone who presents themselves as a scientist, rather than cheap potshots and mudslinging. But given that you resort to personal attacks against me in order to enter your original research into this article I submit that you are attached to your cause in a dialectically violent manner which indicates to me that you are not as neutral toward Papandreou as you present yourself to be. It also indicates to me that you need to improve your dialectic discourse by using logic to persuade your opponent and not try to subdue him by the use of written violence coated in an overdose of insincere passive-aggressive claptrap: Sorry to say so, but I am afraid that Wikipedia is not the battlefield for advancing or protecting political agendas. These concepts are simple and I would have expected any good academic to know them and practice them as a matter of routine academically ethical discourse. But apparently not. C'est la vie. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις  11:46, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Finally, as I mentioned above, you made various personal attacks against me, including that I have a zeal to protect the Papandreou entry. First, I have to admit that I am surprised that such silly, suspicious and uninformed speculation about me originates from someone who presents him/herself as a neutral and deeply thinking academic. I would have expected a higher quality of academic discourse from someone who presents themselves as a scientist, rather than cheap potshots and mudslinging. But given that you resort to personal attacks against me in order to enter your original research into this article I submit that you are attached to your cause in a dialectically violent manner which indicates to me that you are not as neutral toward Papandreou as you present yourself to be. It also indicates to me that you need to improve your dialectic discourse by using logic to persuade your opponent and not try to subdue him by the use of written violence coated in an overdose of insincere passive-aggressive claptrap: Sorry to say so, but I am afraid that Wikipedia is not the battlefield for advancing or protecting political agendas. These concepts are simple and I would have expected any good academic to know them and practice them as a matter of routine academically ethical discourse. But apparently not. C'est la vie. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις  11:46, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Dear Dr K,

I am afraid that I am not even slightly convinced by any of your responses, and still have a tough time making sense why you insist rejecting my entry. However, I cannot afford the time to reply to issues that -after all- are largely irrelevant to the entry at issue.

Overall, I am afraid that our exchanges have sidetracked and that discussing along these lines is unlikely to be productive (that said: my apologies if I insulted you. This was not my intention - i basically intended to elicit a more rational/balanced justification regarding your fierce opposition to my addition that does not raise suspicions of this kind).

As such, may I suggest that you rewrite my sentence in a way that more accurately represents what is written in the the supplied references or, even better, what you perceive to be the atmosphere over Mr Papandreou (to the extent that it differs from what I already wrote)?

Cheers Oxon 1800 (talk) 12:05, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply Oxon 1800 and for your message on my talk. Regarding your comment: This was not my intention - i basically intended to elicit a more rational/balanced justification regarding your fierce opposition to my addition that does not raise suspicions of this kind. I want to assure you that what you perceive as fierce opposition is nothing more than quality control. If an edit does not meet the requirements of the local quality control then it meets opposition, especially in high-visibility articles such as this which often become targets of political attacks. Take this process as an informal peer review of this encyclopaedia. If the proposed edit does not meet the standards then it gets rejected. In the same manner that when in real life a scientist submits their paper to a journal for publication does not employ ad-hominem arguments against the reviewers in the case that the reviewers do not accept his/her paper, similarly we should only employ logic to reach a conclusion on Wikipedia as well when we submit an edit for consideration. I am sure that Socrates would also appreciate that his descendants followed his example by sticking to logic and not having to call each other names. I can only imagine what would have happened to Socrates' legacy had he started calling his opponents names every time he disagreed with them. Not a pretty picture. Now back to the content of your sources. Taking out the comments which attack Papandreou as I mentioned above we have the following remaining statements:
 * Greekreporter.com states:
 * Foxnews states:
 * It follows then that when Foxnews states:
 * that this contradicts the greek reporter when it states that New Democracy were also responsible for the mess:
 * Also, even the Greek reporter says:
 * I hope therefore you realise that for this financial mess the
 * $$Responsibility(George Papandreou) << Responsibility(PASOK)+Responsibility(New Democracy)$$
 * Even your sources contradict each other and even when they agree they are vague as to how much responsibility George Papandreou has. So your proposed edit that he played an important role is not borne out by careful analysis of your sources. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις  18:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, even the Greek reporter says:
 * I hope therefore you realise that for this financial mess the
 * $$Responsibility(George Papandreou) << Responsibility(PASOK)+Responsibility(New Democracy)$$
 * Even your sources contradict each other and even when they agree they are vague as to how much responsibility George Papandreou has. So your proposed edit that he played an important role is not borne out by careful analysis of your sources. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις  18:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Even your sources contradict each other and even when they agree they are vague as to how much responsibility George Papandreou has. So your proposed edit that he played an important role is not borne out by careful analysis of your sources. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις  18:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

'A.' "middle" name: "second"/middle name or patronymic? Sources?
This name and abbreviation in Greek afaik, is predominantly if not universally understood or treated as being a patronym, i.e. Ανδρέα Andrea ( GEN of Ανδρέας) and not as a "second" name, i.e. Ανδρέας Andreas. This article (including the linked-to recording) on the other hand, treats it according to the latter case i.e. for all practical purposes as a middle name. So, any sources on this?!?!? PS There is nothing relevant in the cited sources afaics. Thanatos|talk|contributions 06:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing this out. This is of course utter nonsense, which seems to recur in this article due to his penchant of including the initial of the patronymic in his name (hence giving rise to the pejorative acronym ΓΑΠ), which is then misinterpreted by people. I am removing it per it being bloody obvious and not supported by any sources. Constantine  ✍  07:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I personally wouldn't have gone with a total removal but I guess it will have to do, at least for now, in this case. Thanatos|talk|contributions 14:19, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on George Papandreou. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.primeminister.gov.gr/english/george-papandreou/curriculum-vitae/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090610163929/http://ekloges.ypes.gr:80/pages/index.html?lang=en to http://ekloges.ypes.gr/pages/index.html?lang=en

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

Cheers. —<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 13:32, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on George Papandreou. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.primeminister.gov.gr/english/george-papandreou/

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

Cheers.—<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 18:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Secondary education
The article states he was educated at King City Secondary School, but this is only partially correct. He attended that high school in his final (graduation) year. (See Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou’s surprise connection to Canada at National Post for info) Which school did he attend before that? Mind matrix  02:00, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I added some details to the article - he attended high schools in Illinois and Sweden. Mind  matrix  02:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Is 182nd prime minister correct?
An editor recently changed one use of 182nd to 18th with the link https://primeminister.gr/primeminister/history as a reference. It still said 182nd elsewhere in the article and I couldn't figure out an 18th from the link above. I didn't have the time to count to 182 on List of prime ministers of Greece and not all were prime ministers. Is 182nd correct? Thank you. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 15:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)