Talk:Jean-Claude Juncker

Two sensible editors warring...let's talk instead.
, - . For both of you. You're both sensible veteran editors. Common sense would be that, if you don't understand what the other means with their edit summaries, or if you figure the other person didn't understand yours, or that for whatever other reason edit summaries evidently don't suffice to solve the problem, you stop reverting and start talking. It takes two to edit war, and nothing being warred over here is so dramatically urgent it's time to start Ignoring all rules. There's no vandalism. There's no BLP-vios. There's no copyvios. The world, and wikipedia, will survive if the Wrong Version stands for an hour or two while the two of you discuss the issue.

Regarding the edit summaries: Relgion isn't a username. It's a typo. 'Religion at Village Pump' is what I make of it. Refers to Village pump (policy)/Archive 126. Explanation at IPs talkpage is mildly jumbled (a couple of linebreaks would've helped) but generally makes sense. The 'dummy edit' referred to is the edit immediately subsequent to the short-and-misspelled 'Relgion at Village Pump'.

Full, corrected message thus reads: 'Religion at Village Pump. No caption. MP info incomplete and clutter. Birth name is title. Party info is overwrought and unnecessary and not standard until one editor started. No children. Parent not notable. Not a huge fan of OVERLINK in general'. This explains the removal of everything user removed, but is pretty shorthand (happens often with edit summaries) and in a few cases presumes the editor reading it will know what it means. I'll have to admit that it's not exactly the easiest to parse and required some good looking at the edit and summary simultaneously.

A full translation would be along the lines of "No religion in infobox. See April 2016 Village Pump (Policy) decision. There is no caption, nor is it needed, so I'm removing the empty parameter. The ministerial posts information is cluttered and there's stuff missing, so I fixed it. Birth name parameter is only used for someone's full name, and even then, only when said name is not the title. That doesn't apply here, so removing it. There is no need for European Party information in the infobox and never used to be there until one editor started adding it everywhere. It just clutters things up. Parent, children (and sibling) parameters are only used when those people are independently notable, which isn't the case here, thus removing them. I'm not really a fan of the overlinking guideline, (but as can be seen next edit, I'm willing to concede on that one)."

Now, could the both of you please stop warring, stop cluttering my watchlist and start talking? AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * , thanks for this and apologies to . There's a related ANI going on here but you've certainly cut through the thick of things much better with your distance and cooler head. Not sure where Lamberhurst would like to proceed from here, continuing to discuss here or there, or if this gets moved to there. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:27, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * This subject is under discussion as has indicated. That user has made eight reversions to this page in a little under 4 days. This behaviour needs to be addressed. Lamberhurst (talk) 09:13, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jean-Claude Juncker. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131019084445/http://www.vdl.lu/Politique+et+Administration/Bourgmestre/Xavier+Bettel.html to http://www.vdl.lu/Politique+et+Administration/Bourgmestre/Xavier+Bettel.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:44, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jean-Claude Juncker. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121110040547/http://www.gouvernement.lu/salle_presse/actualite/2009/02-fevrier/04-juncker-pape/ to http://www.gouvernement.lu/salle_presse/actualite/2009/02-fevrier/04-juncker-pape/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140723192017/http://www.epp.eu/epp-elections-congress-dublin-highlights-final-day to http://www.epp.eu/epp-elections-congress-dublin-highlights-final-day

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:04, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jean-Claude Juncker. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131117173955/http://news.rtl.lu/news/headlines/349583.html to http://news.rtl.lu/news/headlines//349583.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140710213616/http://www.epp.eu/jean-claude-juncker-elected-epp-candidate-president-european-commission to http://www.epp.eu/jean-claude-juncker-elected-epp-candidate-president-european-commission

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Religion
Just noticed his religion was missing, I am not too familiar with the wiki format. Could someone add his religion to the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:CF:8200:52A3:9149:925A:F40A:C262 (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Medical issue
Today he showed serious issues, possible due to too much drink/drug: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oecvYFq_wi0 Should be mentioned this in the article. 91.82.60.121 (talk) 20:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No. Richard Keatinge (talk) 20:53, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes. It is clearly notable when a top leader in one of the world's most important organisations has a problem with alcoholism. For reference, see Boris Yeltsin. --Kebman (talk) 09:57, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The Telegraph report that you quote may well be acceptable. An editor's judgement on a Youtube video is not. Richard Keatinge (talk) 11:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The BBC and the Irish Times (and other non-tabloids) are now running with the story that Juncker has been accused of being intoxicated, both on this occasion and in the past. To me, this adds to the argument that such public and media speculation should be included in the article. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 17:38, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Indeed. These should be clearly and briefly reported. He has himself taken the trouble to deny them and their existence is therefore appropriate for a BLP. Richard Keatinge (talk) 18:23, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Something should be in here on his health issues at least. he claims to have previously been injured and a wheelchair user for an extended period. We can't know whether the problem is alcoholism or illness/injury, but the injury is not an explanation of past bizarre behaviour. --Amh15 (talk) 11:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Sciatica could be mentioned, since it was confirmed by a spokeperson (if I remember correctly). Obscene speculations and character assassination don't belong here. --Nemo 08:12, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

At some point however this should be transformed in a section about personal style and "features", where to mention some commonly mentioned characteristics such as outspoken, unconventional (cf. remarks on preferring to be seen as drunk than ill, last state of the union address, spat with Tajani, jokes and translation failures speaking in multiple languages), described alternatively as unfit or as an "old sly fox" (see today ). --Nemo 22:40, 26 July 2018 (UTC)


 * I'd just like to remind everyone that the Daily Mail is not usually regarded as a reliable source, and we should indeed not repeat innuendo from any source. Also, that a serious brain injury can cause long-term personality changes, including a degree of disinhibition. And finally, that policy on biographies of living persons is to be taken seriously. Richard Keatinge (talk) 15:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Junker
The pronunciation of the name Junker given in this page is incorrect. The correct pronunciation starts with the Viced palato-alveolar fricative:[ʒ] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremygardn (talk • contribs) 09:30, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Have you got a source for that? --Boson (talk) 16:00, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

No Parents? No Family History?
Seems kind of interesting there's no family history here for a supreme leader of the EU. Why is this whole article his political life and nothing about him personally? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7012:A900:455:191E:73E1:17D2 (talk) 02:29, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2019
If sciatica is claimed as the cause of JCJ's unsteady gait, a scientific reference that gives unsteady gait as a symptom of sciatica should be provided. I suggest changing the sentence about Sciatica to say that: "JCL claims...", or better yet, the sentence of his drinking should be written first followed with:  "JCL claims that the cause of his occasional unsteady gait is sciatica, which reportedly stems from his 1989 accident." AFAIK, as a medical doctor, Sciatica does not cause the symptoms seen with JCJ. Sciatica can result in sharp pain which would prevent him from walking at the time of the pain, not have trouble walking in a straight line. 207.35.173.178 (talk) 15:43, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Absolute balderdash. As a long term sufferer of sciatia and a retired GP to boot, I can assure you that sciatia can and does cause unsteadiness whilst walking, depending on the nerve or nerves impacted, and of course varying person to person. It is ridiculous, not to mention unethical and against the guidlines of this encyclopedia, that you made an edit to a biography of a living person based on someone's claim with no evidence of their supposed medical qualifications. It is not up to editors of this encylopedia to be second guessing the medical records of living persons. Sciatia is a serious and painful affliction, and you don't need to increase the stigma around it, on whether those who suffer from its side effects will be believed. Undone — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.57.227.227 (talk) 10:38, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

The list of controversies reads as if it was written by Russian trolls
This is more of a stylistic criticism, but there is a noticeable asymmetry between the detailed description of some of the allegations against him (i.e. accusing him of turning Luxemburg into a tax avoidance country), and the counter-arguments being omitted (there is no context about why the "motion of censure" was defeated by a large majority, thereby creating an impression that the EU is in some way corrupt).

Also, in what way is "Juncker wants a European army" considered a controversy? At this point, it would be more controversial to oppose a European army...

Finally, sentences like "However, it is not known whether Juncker apologised for his outburst." come across as pointless filler, just to make the section longer.

2001:A61:2A2A:501:C865:22F9:B6BB:2837 (talk) 01:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I removed the army bit. The first bit in the section should go into the main text--and of course "Controversies" is a crappy title, and such sections need to be avoided--though the last paragraph seems legit in this context. I read the article that the last sentences are based on, and I disagree: it's not really pointless filler. Drmies (talk) 02:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

The prospect of a European Army was certainly controversial in the UK. Like many things that underpinned Brexit, it probably went entirely over the heads of continental Europeans. It should be extremely easy to source. Poi hatch (talk) 18:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Wholesale removal of honors etc
User:Drmies has summarily removed the entire "Awards and decorations" section, first claiming they are meaningless and unverified, now upgraded to a claim their lack of verification in secondary sources poses a risk of harm to Mr Junker. I find these arguments so specious, so easily disproven in a few seconds of Googling even in the case of the honorary degrees (verifiable, non-harmful, exceptionally relevant), I can only conclude Drmies is trying to impose a personal editorial standard on this biography, and is cynically using sound Wikipedia editorial policies (information must be verifiable and not cause harm) to achieve it. Poi hatch (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Feel free to actually improve the article; you're obviously equipped with the knowledge and the experience, despite this being only the second edit from this account. "Exceptionally relevant" is of course something that will have to be proven by secondary sources--whether that can be done for all the little flags with the honors that powerful people hand to each other remains to be seen. Drmies (talk) 16:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I already proved even the Sheffield degree is easily sourced, clearly not harmful and extremely relevant. I put this evidence to you directly, on the talk page as you asked, and you still ignored it. It takes no experience with Wikipedia to see you are abusing Wikipedia policy aimed at preventing actual harm, to justify your personal view of what is important information. Disturbingly, your motive seems deeply personal, some kind of dislike of world leaders in general. So the potential for harm is arguably in allowing you to control the content of this page with a dishonest reading of policy. Your warning to me is simply a continuation of this tactic. It is now proven that you are removing information you know can be verified. I will not play this game. I reject your specious arguments. Poi hatch (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Ha, who's making things personal here? Also, "disturbingly" is a dangling modifier in that sentence. Drmies (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Mention his hobby (pinball)
Given the above, I was not surprised to see in this edit that Drmies has applied a personal standard of trivia which totally contradicts the "proper secondary sources" that were provided to support that text and which, in addition to the fact they thought it worth noting at all, do appear to show there is indeed something unusual about his chosen hobby (pinball) that merits it being considered unusual. This is a biography after all. It is meant to give a window into the person as well as record their career. Poi hatch (talk) 18:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)