Talk:Philip Dewinter

Picture
It would probably be good to find a better picture of him.--Carabinieri 17:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Flemish Activist
Hello, I noticed you put Filip Dewinter in the category "Flemish activists". That's quite an assertion ! Do you have any reputable sources to substantiate this ? Thanks.--LucVerhelst 20:25, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Calling Dewinter a Flemish activist was based, in part, upon his youthful actions: "In 1978, as a 16-year old, he founded the Flemish Student Action Group (Vlaamse Studenten Actie Groep)." Activist is not the same as terrorist. You said "That's quite an assertion !"  I am not sure what you mean. Activists can be liberal or conservative.  But I am not sure that I have ever seen a middle-of-the-road activist. Bejnar 20:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "Flemish activist" is quite an honorary title in Flanders. As such, it is very POV. Bestowing such a title to a controversial political figure as Filip Dewinter is seen as taking sides for the far right Vlaams Belang, and against the democratic part of the Flemish movement. Do you have sources ? --LucVerhelst 21:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I used activist to describe political activity directed towards Flemish nationalism. If you choose to see activist as a POV word, I cannot help you.  Some people, who are not necessarily Flemish, see all separatist movements as inhumane. For them, Flemist activist probably implies a negative connotation. Do you deny that Dewinter founded, or help found, the Vlaamse Studenten Actie Groep?  Bejnar 21:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know whether he did. It is not relevant, I think. Do you have sources that call Dewinter a Flemish Activist, or is it just your opinion ? In the latter case, putting that cat there is original research.
 * Or are you going to put everybody in this category that has had "political activity directed towards Flemish nationalism" ? In that case, you should at least add someone like Wilfried Martens... --LucVerhelst 21:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you cannot see that creation of a student group whose name could be translated into English as the Flemish Student Activist Group is a relevant act by Dewinter, then I cannot help you. As to Wilfried Martens he has not such record in his past that I was able to find. As to putting everybody into the category, the answer is no, unless they clearly belong there on an objective basis. Aside, the process of categorization based on verified record is not original research. List of original research   Bejnar 22:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You could as well argue that PD has done a lot to damage the struggle for Flemish independence. He and his party have always been one of the main arguments for the francophones to block further federalisation in Belgium.
 * As for Wilfried Martens : he was the prime minister that reformed Belgium from a centralised into a federal (nearly confederal) state. It's thanks to him that Flanders has the amount of independance it has today. --LucVerhelst 07:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You might look at the use of the phrase Flemish activist in Children of of the repression Dutch Organisation of children Belgie Bejnar 22:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That text equates "Flemish activist" with "Collaborator with the Germans". That's kind of POV too, isn't it. (Although I must admit that generally, PD is believed to be on that side of the political spectrum.) --LucVerhelst 07:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That article, and a number of others about both WWI and WWII use the term "Flemish activist", but they do not necessarily equate them with collaborator. Reading carefully, the articles distinguish between those Flemish activists who did collaborate and those who didn't.  Bejnar 17:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Far right
'''This article does not deals about the far right history of Dewinter. He can not so easy be called an conservative'''

I would like to understand the reason why the edits linking Filip Dewinter to extreme-right circles are systematically deleted. Are they deemed not relevant or inaacurate? Please comment.--85.27.14.44 00:06, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Answer: the Vlaams Belang has origins in the far right and has still a strong support of far right groups. Nowadays the Vlaams Belang tries to ditch these links to attract a larger group of supporters but is still far from home to be called a "conservative" party. For example, if you had to compare the Vlaams Belang with a English party it would not be the conservatives (not now or in the old days) but UKIP or Veritas. So, unless we can think out a comprimise, I will not accept that the Vlaams Belang is called a conservative party without any additional and necessary remarks.

Talk: Dewinter has bounds with far right and wants to take on a more moderate stance. (or are it some other party members?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.118.164.129 (talk • contribs)


 * The party is not "far right." It is conservative because of the moral catholics. Intangible 20:07, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Care to provide a reference for that assertion ?--LucVerhelst 20:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Then you have to write that it is conservative on moral questions. Conservatism as an political ideology is much larger then just moral questions.  I do not want to condemn Vlaams Belang but there are a large amount of people (you can not ignore them) that state that VLaams Belang or Dewinter are far right.  May be you do not agree but then at least we have to show the two opposing views in a dictionary.  Wiki is not meant to show only one point of view.Portalis 00:O3, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * But one is not painting a picture of the party here, that can be done in the Vlaams Belang article. This article is about Filip Dewinter as a person. It is not necessary that Vlaams Belang adheres to every 'conservative' philosophy out there. Intangible 00:10, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but then you have to show that Dewinter does not support every conservative philosphy that is around the place. So, I have changed the conservative to moral conservative. You can change to everthing you want, if it only refers to the morals. Portalis 12:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've removed it, the conservativeness of the VB is not particularly important for this article. Intangible 17:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

npov tag
I've removed the tag. The text currently is NPOV. Intangible 00:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

pov-sect
I added a pov-sect tag because it's POV to display first-party sources only. Punkmorten 12:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * There is nothing POV about quoting Dewinter in his own article at Wikipedia. Intangible 15:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * When the only references are first-party sources, this is imbalanced and thus POV. Punkmorten 12:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * They were printed in newspapers as well. Thus certainly public. Intangible 13:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Prove it. By the way, I replaced the tag with primarysources. Punkmorten 14:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Philip vs Filip
In all fairness, I think Mr. Dewinter's christian name should be "Filip" and not "Philip". "Philip" may be the official form, but if Mr. Dewinter chooses to write his christian name as "Filip" there is not much one can do about it. After all, we also speak about "Bart Somers", "Jaak Gabriels", "Annemie Neyts", "Pim Fortuyn", and "Bill Clinton" despite the fact that their official names are "Bartolomeus Somers", "Jacobus Gabriels", "Anne-Marie Neyts", "Wilhelmus Fortuijn", and "William Clinton". Ivo von Rosenqvist -Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivo von Rosenqvist (talk • contribs) 11:21, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Either way the talk page and the article should match up.--T. Anthony 03:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Islamophobia category
It has not been deleted yet and although I'm loathe to put it on articles of living people he is noted as one who discusses the term. See Islamophobia.--T. Anthony 02:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I put him in the new category due to his relevance to the issue. See Flemish Republic article and the Wikipedia article I linked to. It's true that this should be restricted on people per BLP but


 * 1) The category at base is not meant to suggest the subject is Islamophobic as half of what's in it are civil rights groups.
 * 2) People I added who simply self-describe as Islamophobic, but who were not significant to the topic, were removed and rightly so.
 * 3) The category is for people and organizations significant to the subject. As a political figure of some importance his opinions on the topic would be relevant in a way the opinions of actresses or singers would not be.
 * 4) As mentioned his opinions on the subject are part of his notability or significance.

If you wish the category to be re-deleted that's a different discussion. Thank you.--T. Anthony (talk) 03:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)