Jump to content

Talk:Anders Behring Breivik

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Fjotolf Hansen)


[edit]

It would be quite helpful if this Wiki site included information or links on investigation into the funding sources and corporate, education, and social networks of Øystein Storrvik and Geir Lippestad legal firms.

While an almost-obfuscatory blizzard of questions have been raised on this webpage around "What is sanity?" (And more obliquely, perhaps: "What are the limits of a democratic society?"), Breivik/Hansen's ideological work and dogged tactics suggest continued support by the larger global Antienlightenment/military-feudal restoration community that has not been criminalized outside Norway, but has rather risen to ideological and political leadership globally. To understand Breivik/Hansen, it seems most pertinent to understand the community of extraordinary ongoing support. Given their extraordinary donation of valuable legal expertise and time in a country in which public funding for criminal defense is the norm, Øystein Storrvik and Geir Lippestad are obvious connections to such a national and international Antienlightenment, military-feudal restoration community. Fanboi Chau (talk) 02:07, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any connection ' between your ideas and the article, seem ' a little strained, to the say the least. Maybe, when the trial verdict has been fully digested, they'll bring out the nutcracker? 2001:2020:303:C4EB:910D:634D:B1EB:7217 (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Post-2012 criminal history of Anders Breivik

[edit]

Hello, I was thinking about starting an article about the post-2012 criminal history of Anders Breivik. Thoughts?--Marginataen (talk) 15:57, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[what]?

[edit]

There are bunches of words and phrases in square brackets in this article, particularly in the section "Breivik's testimony". I'm not understanding the meaning of these. Why antidepressants [medication]? What's with "Breivik said that the birds are better than nothing, but he [would rather have, or] wishes for a mammal"? Or "But [the authorities or] you say that it makes no difference". Are these in the actual sources? Are these a problem with translation? Are these editorial emendation? They seem to have been inserted on or about January 9 2024. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 00:11, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, these were weird. I removed most of them while cleaning up the article. In case any are left, please go ahead and remove them. — Chrisahn (talk) 17:02, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've created the article created the article post-2012 legal history of Anders Breivik with content copied from his own page. There are simply too many details for all of it to remain on his own page, which is in need of trimming. We cannot have every single meticulous detail on this page, with even more trials likely in the future--Marginataen (talk) 15:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Darth Stabro has added an Overly detailed template to Post-2012 legal history of Anders Breivik. I tend to agree with that, and it also just goes to show how much this article is overly detailed as the content is copied from here. Marginataen (talk) 09:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did not add it. ~Darth StabroTalk  Contribs 13:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I cut down the excessive details in this page. The page Post-2012 legal history of Anders Breivik is not necessary and should be deleted. — Chrisahn (talk) 17:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a mess

[edit]

The sections about Breivik's trials regarding his prison conditions and parole petitions are quite a mess. Tons of details have been added over time. Largely by Norwegian IPs, as far as I can tell. Lots of broken English. Most of the details were irrelevant. Some stuff misrepresented the sources, e.g. cherry-picking quotes to make Breivik look like a poor victim, omitting quotes that correctly describe him as a radical mass-murderer.

I tried to clean up that mess, but there's still a lot of work to do. For example, I kept most references, though they may not be pertinent anymore. (I don't speak Norwegian, and checking the sources using automated translation is a bit of a nuisance. I think we should prefer English sources.) More importantly, some sections still report mostly the claims and complaints by Breivik and his lawyers, while they contain little of what the government attorneys and the judges said. I tagged the sections accordingly.

Some sections may still not fully make sense, especially the ones about the latest trials. There were lots of irrelevant details in these sections, but no general information regarding what the trials are about etc.

Maybe these (largely anonymous) editors also pushed excessive details and pro-Breivik POV into other parts of the article. I haven't checked.

Please, fellow editors, go ahead and clean up more stuff, e.g. sources that aren't relevant anymore or biased content. And please make sure that the article doesn't get filled with irrelevant cruft again. — Chrisahn (talk) 17:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Real good work. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 04:45, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]