Jump to content

Talk:Călin Georgescu

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

No sources

[edit]

Most of the Career section is written as an election ad, and lacks any sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yury Kudryashov (talk • contribs) 22:23, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was just about to mention this myself. Now he has achieved a shock first-round victory in the Romanian Presidential Election it's clear that the quality of this page must be drastically improved.
"He combines comprehensive knowledge of the principles and practice of sustainable development with hands-on field experience by working with stakeholders in the public and private sectors as well as with civil society in order to design, implement and follow through to the completion of specific projects under Local Agenda 21 (initiated by United Nations Development Programme in 1992) for more than 40 Romanian municipalities."
Take this quote. It's like something off of a PR website. Not acceptable for Wikipedia standards. I don't know enough about the guy to do much myself but hopefully some Romanian-speakers/knowers will sort it out given his page will see increased activity in the coming days. LevatorScapulaeSyndrome (talk) 08:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would seem to be getting worse. Users with no other meaningful contributions are now editorializing; user 'Ruchinul' has exactly 10 prior edits to a single unrelated page some 15 years ago (presumably to hit the autoconfirm threshold), then commits a series of untagged reverts / deletions to this page, pushing a pro-Georgescu viewpoint and burying his far-right associations outside of the lead (while also adding material on his fondness for Antonescu and Codreanu etc further down...). Smells rather abusive. 2604:CA00:10B:4D58:0:0:1261:687F (talk) 12:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear editor, Please do not assume that I do not know anything if I was not editing until now, and please use meaningful resources and verify your sources, not to became biased by the development in the Romanian's streets these days, and make a deep research before you unilaterally = helped by some media Articles that make references of references, and not the declarations of the living person subject of this article = declare for example "Far Right Extremist". To be correct in your assumptions, you probably wish to visit sources where the Living Person Calin Georgescu speak for himself = yesterday = https://www.realitatea.net/emisiuni/culiselestatuluiparalel?id=georgescu . You must know that this present article was used by Romanian biased Admins of Wiki.ro (I have forwarded the proof to En.Wiki Admins already), that use this present article and moreover adding multiple infrigements to Wikimedia Foundation Code of Ethics, but not observing the Living Person's declarations and in stand usiang (like you) references from references from biased Media. Moreover, please observe all sides before making alegations of my expertise or trustness (please, visit my website to see that I am one of the most Accredited person in the world) www.btzmich.com . Let us use the common sense to see all sides before making unsupported alegations. Rechinul (talk) 16:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rechinul: Excuse me, this is probably off-topic, but since you mentioned your website above, you mean that you are "one of the most Accredited person in the world [sic!]" because you "invented for mankind a First Degree Perpetual Motion, that would let Einstein and Tesla amazed"? --Pafsanias (talk) 17:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BBC is like the gold standard for WP:BLP. You are not allowed to delete "far-right" just because you do not like it. That would be paramount bias.
The credentials of our editors don't matter. A 14 years old kid who can WP:CITE WP:RS is more valuable than a full professor who can't or won't.
later on clarifying that it was imposed to Romanians without specific mandatory On-Set on horizontal Economy of Romania, but just merely "Ordered" as such.—I can't make heads or tails of it. tgeorgescu (talk) 06:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

I don't think there's any question that this individual does not meet the notability guidelines. That and the variety of other issues make me wonder why this wasn't taken down in 2010 when it was first noticed. Fred.Pendleton (talk) 00:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That has changed. Now he did won the first round of the president election of Romania. Ofcourse at the moment he loses. He will also lose the right of an article. Carsrac (talk) 14:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... no. As Wikipedians say, notability is forever. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are mostly lies about him,publicated by media,wiki and so on... they've cancelled ellection with no Reason,with no proofs,democracy is gonne,long live democracy Mariablc (talk) 05:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Călin Georgescu. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:04, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

potential sources for overhail/extension

[edit]

--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:47, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 November 2024

[edit]


Contribuții profesionale Călin Georgescu a fost un susținător neobosit al conceptului de dezvoltare durabilă, aducând contribuții importante în promovarea strategiilor care echilibrează nevoile economice, sociale și de mediu. În calitate de expert în agronomie și consultant internațional, el a colaborat cu organizații de renume pentru a identifica soluții viabile în fața provocărilor globale precum schimbările climatice, gestionarea resurselor naturale și dezvoltarea rurală.

Contribuții profesionale Călin Georgescu a fost un susținător neobosit al conceptului de dezvoltare durabilă, aducând contribuții importante în promovarea strategiilor care echilibrează nevoile economice, sociale și de mediu. În calitate de expert în agronomie și consultant internațional, el a colaborat cu organizații de renume pentru a identifica soluții viabile în fața provocărilor globale precum schimbările climatice, gestionarea resurselor naturale și dezvoltarea rurală. Alexrus.jr (talk) 01:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. @Alexrus.jr: This is the English Wikipedia and not a Romanian version of LinkedIn. Suggested contributions should be in English and neutral in tone. Regards SoWhy 07:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of sourced information

[edit]

@Rechinul and RomanianUserEU: Once a piece of information made its way to mainstream WP:RS, you cannot successfully remove it from Wikipedia. That means that your fight to whitewash this article is futile. We are many experienced editors, and the admins do support us. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 November 2024

[edit]

Removal of the claims of "spread[ing] information sourced to Russian state media." The sources linked, Radio Free Europe (a source that is noted as being unreliable without other backing sources) and Ziaristii (a news website with very little notability or reliability) make no such claim: not once do they say that Georgescu repeats information from Russian state media. The sources state that Sputnik and RT put him in a positive light, and that he "glorified the virtues of Russian state politics" in the case of RFE (without clarifying what that means, or when, or where), neither of which are claims that he is actively spreading information given to him by Russian state media. As per WP:BLP, accusations that he is acting as an mouthpiece of the Russian state media should be treated with upmost caution: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. As neither of the sources (of whom reliability is not proven) actually make this claim, this information should be removed, or at least backed up with much better sources. DvcDeBlvngis (talk) 21:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are several other sources which state that AUR party members accused him of being pro-Russian, and the sources state that he seeks at least to appease Russia, and he respects Putin. tgeorgescu (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pro-Russian, anti-Nato, 'has praised Putin' are all easily sourcable[1], but 'spread information sourced to Russian state media' could use stronger sourcing. Radio Free Europe is MREL according to WP:RFE/RL, and best attributed. I don't know enough about the Romanian news landscape to judge reliability of Romanian sources. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 22:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes; I don't doubt that he is pro-Russian, or at the least amenable to Russia, but that is not what the contested language claims. Such definitive and strong wording should be backed up be similarly definitive and strong sourcing, both with direct claims of such and with heavily reliable sources, otherwise it comes off as conflation or WP:OR. As well, placing the same sources for both "pro-Russian statements" and "spread[ing] information sourced to Russian state media" without individual attribution for which claims which reads as a motte-and-bailey fallacy. DvcDeBlvngis (talk) 08:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaning towards removing it. I can't find anything that quite backs up that exact wording. The closest is one of the included references that says "Călin Georgescu, propunerea AUR și a senatoarei Diana Iovanovici-Șoșoacă pentru funcția de prim-ministru, nu se sfiește să facă propagandă pe față Rusiei autocrate a lui Putin." Unfortunately I'm reliant on Google translate which gives the last part of that sentence as "is not shy to make propaganda in the face of Putin's autocratic Russia." That isn't very clear, a proper translation from a Romanian speaker would be helpful. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 11:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a native speaker. A proper translation would be "he does not shy away from openly supporting autocratic Russia and Putin." ImperialTruidencian (talk) 12:33, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even I can see that it clearly contains the word propaganda. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 12:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After conferring with a friend of mine from Bucharest, as used here, it is a closer meaning to "propagandizes", i.e. supports. Regardless, making the claim that he is actively spreading "Russian disinformation sourced to state media" is a claim requiring a much higher burden of proof, a claim that the Romanian page for Georgescu does not make in the slightest with much more access to native sourcing. DvcDeBlvngis (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: Requested edit is contested by tgeorgescu and it appears a discussion may be blossoming. Both of those things make it ineligible for it to remain in the queue. Consensus will need to prevail here. —Sirdog (talk) 06:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. Ziaristii.com is a mouthpiece with bombastic titles such as "Let's check on the ongoing coup" regarding the legally order vote recount (link). ImperialTruidencian (talk) 12:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever. The claim that he is pro-Russian is sourced (WP:V) to The Guardian. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody is denying that; the issue is stating that he is actively spreading "Russian disinformation" from "state media". The Guardian article does not state this at all. DvcDeBlvngis (talk) 03:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit extended-protected incorrect fact in first paragraph

[edit]

The article says "He is also a member of the Club of Rome International in Switzerland." This isn't correct and should be changed to "was a member between 2012-2021."

Hummingbird001 (talk) 12:18, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source for the dates? I've removed the sentence for the moment, as he doesn't appear to be a current member and I can't find a source for his membership dates. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 12:34, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find a public record of it either. He is definetely not a member now. Hummingbird001 (talk) 08:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to mark this as done, as the membership dates have been removed. They will require a reliable source to be added back. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 13:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Climate change

[edit]

Hi

I have seen no source about the fact he claims climate change is " "a global scam", which "has nothing to do with reality" Panam2014 (talk) 20:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of the attached references contained the quote, but it appears to be from Ziare.com[2]. I've added the references to the article. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 21:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Close Paraphrasing

[edit]

Part of the article, particularly the Diplomatic Career section appears to closely paraphrase this UN webpage[3] which is copyrighted[4]. The same copyright issues appear to be present on the Romanian article, so I'm guessing it was copied over. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 12:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly are 'the same copyright issues' which appear to be present on the Romanian article? --Pafsanias (talk) 21:12, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said close paraphrasing of a copyrighted work, in particular the 'Studii' and 'Carieră profesională' sections. Obviously it has been translated into Romanian, but that is still a copyright concern. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 00:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see which paragraphs may be suspected of violating copyright. The names of some institutions, positions and titles are strictly formalized and cannot be avoided. Dates are the same and their chronological order must be observed. So there is little room for reformulating those texts, which are properly cited, but we shall probably try to improve the two sections through small cosmetic changes.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out that the European Research Center for the Club of Rome mentioned in the English infobox could not be identified under this name. --Pafsanias (talk) 07:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't about name and dates, but sentences and phrases. Obviously the former can't be avoided, but the latter is copyright infringement. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 12:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, I cannot see those sentences and phrases and would be very grateful if you could point us to some examples. We will be happy to fix the problem where necessary. --Pafsanias (talk) 13:08, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Age

[edit]

I counted five journalists and two professors. But in order to remain conservative, I have stated "(at least three journalists and two professors)". tgeorgescu (talk) 00:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Religion is a personal stuff. Assigning a religious belief to a living person is big no-no, unless that person has declared his association with it.Anonimu (talk) 08:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's say that his public declarations never made a secret of peddling New Age tropes. It's not like he was secretly filmed during a masonic ceremony. It is stuff he willingly broadcasts to millions of people. Like I was preaching Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide for years, but cannot be called a Protestant because I self-identify as Catholic. Or I could recite the Shahada on live TV, and five minutes later state I'm a pious Catholic, so that everyone has to call me a Catholic. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonimu: I took your criticism to the heart. I no longer write about his subjective beliefs, because his private thoughts are unknowable. I wrote only about his public statements.
We cannot meaningfully discuss his private thoughts, because we have no way of knowing what his private thoughts are. But his public statements are a matter of public record.
So, what he is: Eastern Orthodox (based upon self-identification). What he preaches in public: New Age. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Notwally: Anonimu made peace with the inclusion. As stated above, this isn't a claim about CG's religion, it is a claim about the ideology propagated through his speeches. We don't exactly know if he believes what he says, or just peddles something which he knows that his voters like. So, it isn't a WP:BLP issue anymore. E.g. Le Monde outright characterized him as an Eastern Orthodox who leans towards the New Age. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A lack of response is not a consensus, and other editors should be speaking for themselves. I certainly do not agree with adding content about someone's religion on the basis of those sources, many of which are poor quality or not reliable (including an article which is merely quoting a very POV Facebook post from a priest, which I had pointed out to you on BLPN). Anything related to a living person is a BLP issue. If you think the content is appropriate, then make you arguments and see if a consensus can be formed. – notwally (talk) 23:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Notwally: So: now there is a problem because there are too many sources? I say keep bursa.ro, tvr.ro, and Le Monde. That should be enough. The pseudonym MAKE does not mean that the author is anonymous.
Don't tell me that preaching New Age cannot be called preaching New Age. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Morals: there are more than 20 WP:RS which WP:V that CG preaches a New Age discourse. And every week that number seems to increase. A much simpler point is that he caters for a large chunk of Romanian voters who seek to flee from rationality. (Christianity being at heart a rational religion.) tgeorgescu (talk) 15:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declarations

[edit]

Hi

Some should be added, for example about Egyptians pyramids, aliens, etc. Panam2014 (talk) 14:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As this is an article about a living person it requires good sources for anything contentious to be added. Do you have any links to high quality reporting of the details? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 18:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ActivelyDisinterested: sure: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9] Panam2014 (talk) 22:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great do you have a suggestuon for how it should be written up? -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 01:08, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 December 2024

[edit]

Please remove far right extremism and conspiracy theorist posted on the person's file, there is no factual evidence that he is a far right extremist or conspiracy theorist. Based on a couple of interviews he has denied extremism or conspiracy theories. Page must be updated otherwise it breakes the rules by who the person really is,by having the words mentioned above instead stating who the person really is, this is creating a persona online by impling lies folowing a media intervention. Please note without proof from a state organization stating on paper that he is a far right extremist and a conspiracy theorist. Until you have proof that he is please edit and remove the words (far right extremist and conspiracy theorist.) 213.78.131.193 (talk) 02:42, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Sources are cited. If you have specific objections to them, or have sourced additions about his denials in interviews, please feel free to make other request(s). LizardJr8 (talk) 04:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The cited sources just make the claim without evidence.
That's not how citations work. 2A00:79E0:2E69:7:FDCA:A98C:48A8:9A6 (talk) 18:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that literally is how citations to reliable sources work. They are the evidence because they are reliable with a history of fact-checking. – notwally (talk) 20:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 December 2024

[edit]

Everything written on this page about President Calin Georgescu is a manipulation of the system. Calin Georgescu is not pro-Russia but is pro-Romania, pro-NATO, pro-Europe. He is of the Christian faith and not New Age. He is a convinced family man and a good man. 49.196.209.151 (talk) 00:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. FifthFive (talk) 01:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely Biased description

[edit]

"Călin Georgescu [...] is a Romanian far-right politician, agronomist, and prominent conspiracy theorist,"..."his views have been described as pro-Russian, anti-NATO, and far-right, and he has been described as an ultranationalist, far-right populist, and extremist.[...] "

Wow...This is an obvious and classic unilateral "extremist" view of the author of this Wikipedia article, that may reflect a personal choice of words, and only feeds into the misinformation and the smearing propaganda that goes on around this presidential candidate. It has nothing to do with the reality.

No hard evidence here but only "hear-say" from conveniently selected sources. The truth is probably at 180 degrees. The fact that he was the first choice of the electorate in the recent presidential elections speaks for itself.

This article should be completely revised or replaced with a truthful, balanced, and unbiased one. 66.65.71.70 (talk) 02:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uh-huh, sure. Take it up with the news organizations, not us. We just follow what they say. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 04:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So wikipedia just echoes media propoganda?
What use is it then? 2A00:79E0:2E69:7:FDCA:A98C:48A8:9A6 (talk) 18:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an encyclopedia that bases its content on reliable sources. If you want to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS regarding your personal perceptions of the "media", then this is not the place for you. – notwally (talk) 20:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia echoes whatever the media (and academia) says. This is by design, and this is what we are doing. We do not conduct original research here, and this is not a place to right great wrongs. Given that Wikipedia is the 7th most visited site on the internet, I can comfortable say that people find it very useful. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The equivalent of Wikipedia in the Soviet Union was the Great Soviet Encyclopedia which was fully compliant with Marxist-Leninist ideology, it was a mouthpiece of the "reliable sources" (Pravda). It was the most popular encyclopedia in the Soviet Union therefore we can comfortably say that it was useful. It was also full of lies. 2001:4C4E:2484:5100:2A43:B657:9016:FBC6 (talk) 10:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is an attempt to collect the knowledge of a materialistic and mechanistic world view and to present the ideological view of neoliberalism and state-conformist western politics. https://www.freewiki.eu/en/index.php?title=Welcome_to_FreeWiki
I also have to say that I visit Wikipedia every day, while I visit FreeWiki two or three times per year. tgeorgescu (talk) 12:01, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Soviet Union had widespread oppression and censorship, of course their encyclopedia is going to be a propaganda tool fully compliant with their Marxist-Leninst ideology. The same would go for everything published there. Luckily for us, freedom of speech and press does exist. If, by making this comparison, you are saying that some unknown entity or government manipulates and controls the media, I do not know what you expect us to do about it. Wikipedia, as a tertiary source, aims to summarize existing mainstream knowledge. If you believe the mainstream to be biased, then, as I mentioned before, take it up with them. If you get them to change, we will follow in due course. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 02:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead section

[edit]

I believe that some positions should be taken out of there, as they are not that important.

1. European Research Centre for the Club of Rome is an obscure research centre of the think tank. This research centre we barely find it mentioned on the Internet. Should be taken out.

2. United Nations Global Sustainable Index Institute: First, as you can see the internal link is wrong. International Institute for Sustainable Development has the website https://www.iisd.org/, whereas United Nations Global Sustainable Index Institute has the website https://www.ungsii.org/. They are not one and the same, so the internal link should be removed from where it's mentioned (the infobox and the lead section). As it was proven by Romanian media [10], the institute has nothing to do with UN other than the name and it's only a private foundation, so it's not that important. This also should be taken out from the infobox and the lead section (and moved in the article itself).

3. The position Special Rapporteur in the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights should remain in the infobox and also be inserted in the lead section, as it was diplomatic success at that time [11].

4. Most likely he was a member of the club of Rome as there are multiple sources which confirm this [12] [13] [14] and this too should be inserted in the lead section, but the mention of the obscure research centre there is not necessary as I said at 1. Gdaniel111 (talk) 13:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Călin_Georgescu&oldid=1262571517"