Jump to content

Talk:Jean-Luc Mélenchon

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

Untitled

[edit]

Is this surname pronounced with soft ch (like English sh) or hard (like k)? 195.72.173.52 (talk) 10:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'ch' in French is like 'sh' in English. --78.109.80.118 (talk) 18:27, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
True, we pronounce the French way ch in French = sh in English, but the name is Spanish.90.22.28.214 (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Translated|fr|Jean-Luc Mélenchon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Culloty82 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tangier was not part of 'French Morocco'

[edit]

Morocco in times of the protectorate was divided in a larger "French" zone, a smaller "Spanish" zone and the free city of Tangier. So he was born in Morocco but not in 'French Morocco' (neither 'Spanish Morocco' either). --85.84.229.109 (talk) 22:15, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Death

[edit]

He died today. [1] Alts (talk) 12:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

haha ! yoru link gives "anticipated obituary". Everyday is there the day of the death of any living person, so they'll be automatically right when people will really die... Noben k (talk) 01:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comments

[edit]

There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:11, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Freemason" category?

[edit]

Currently, Mélenchon's article is in the category of "French Freemasons"? Is this genuine? I was under the impression that the French left (left of the social democrats) were anti-masonic since the 1920s. Even Trotsky condemned freemasonry (I notice Mélenchon was a Trotskyite in the 1970s). There are a few websites which mention his Masonic links but how reliable? This video? Claíomh Solais (talk) 16:55, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-German sentiment

[edit]

For what it's worth, this Guardian article cites Mélenchon's own 2015 book Bismarck’s Herring (The German Poison) (published in 2016 in paperback as Le hareng de Bismarck : Le poison allemande, ISBN: 978-2290127940) as the source of his anti-German sentiments. JezGrove (talk) 19:38, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

this section is unsatisfactory, as a long accusation of anti german sentiment is not balanced by quotes from Mélenchon's people.2A01:CB08:634:DA00:3829:BB97:D187:78A1 (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Jean-Luc Mélenchon. 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) 09:21, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Jean-Luc Mélenchon. 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) 09:05, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CRIF, Vel d'hiv, Corbyn

[edit]

This section should be deleted, or at least extensively rewritten. CRIF doesn't "represent French Jews," it has no official mandate. Its links to the Likud are well known. No one has in good faith ever accused Mélenchon of being an antisemite. This is explicitely mentioned in the French version of the page. Daily newspaper France Soir wrote that "aucun des interlocuteurs contactés par le journal n'accuse Jean-Luc Mélenchon d'antisémitisme, ni ne le sous-entend." It should be noted that Mélenchon recently (2020) criticized the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran for having the destruction of Israel as one of the pillars of its regime, calling it an "unbearable project that creates extraordinary tensions in the region".

I have moved this section to its correct place in the chronology. The English Wikipedia article about Mélenchon uses reliable sources to make the claims to which you object. In fact, the French version of the page is not free of assertions about Mélenchon alleged attitude, even if the equivalent section begins with the article you mention. "Charges of antisemitismtism" ("Accusations d'antisémitisme") would not be a suitable title for the section here as the content is rather different. I have changed the heading to "CRIF, the Holocaust and alleged antisemitism" which describes the content. Whether or not CRIF has a close connection with Likud, is not of immediate concern here. Philip Cross (talk) 12:30, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Philip, I appreciate you taking the time to look into this:
First, it is factually incorrect to write that CRIF "represents French Jews." The "représentative" in the name means representative of a coalition of different organizations. The phrasing in the article gives the impression that CRIF has some kind of official legitimacy and speaks in the name of France's Jewish community as a whole. This is not the case. While CRIF carries some weight in the French political landscape (thanks, it is argued, to its close connections to the party of Israel's prime minister), it's support is marginal among French Jews. Second, simply including "the Holocaust" in the title may give the impression that Melenchon is a Holocaust denier, which is obviously false and certainly doesn't reflect the content of the section. Melenchon's position on this matter is that of French officials since De Gaulle, namely that the Vichy regime was illegal. For the French State to formally recognize responsibilities in the deportation of the Jews would be to legitimize the Vichy regime. Third, it is incorrect to write that Melenchon "criticised UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn for apologising for antisemitism in his party." Melenchon denounced the antisemitism accusations against Corbyn as a smear campaign and said that he himself, having learned from the Corbyn precedent, wouldn't apologize if the same tactic was to be used against him. The Telegraph article cited in the section reports: "The Labour defeat “must serve as a lesson”, said Mr Mélenchon". It is not the same as criticizing Corbyn for doing what he did. The phrasing should be amended. Melenchon later published a post on his blog denouncing the use of antisemitism as a political weapon, asking whether the same strategy would be used against Bernie Sanders in the US presidential elections. He called the "method ... absurd, offending, but more importantly, dangerous. For all this is at the expense of the real fight against antisemitism. Its main result is to lower the vigilance threshold of sincere anti-racists." 18:00, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
The use of the word "pogroms," quoted from the Paul Berman piece, to describe the 2014 demonstrations is questionable at best. This piece hardly qualifies as a reliable source and IMO should be replaced with a more objective assessment. 19:00, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Iran

[edit]

I added a section with Melenchon's comments on the Iranian regime following the death of Soleimani. 15:40, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE issues

[edit]

The Foreign Policy section of the article contains the following:

Commenting for The Guardian in April 2017, Natalie Nougayrède, a former executive editor and managing editor of Le Monde,[63] noted:

"In his 2015 book Bismarck’s Herring, Mélenchon wrote that, 'Germany is again a danger', its 'imperialism' is 'returning', and the EU is its 'new empire'. He's described Germans as 'grumbling Teutons' who seek to 'deport' their old people to Eastern Europe or Thailand. And he's written that German 'expansionism' was at work in the country's 1990 reunification – an 'annexation' of East Germany, in his words. That, in itself, is no small rewriting of history, and no small denial of a people's freely expressed will after the fall of communism. His criticism of Angela Merkel's eurozone policies goes far beyond the economic. It peddles nationalistic, if not bigoted, hatreds. He may have tried to soften that impression by saying he wants 'the peoples of Europe' to revolt against their governments – and not start to fight among themselves. But he has hardly backtracked on any of his earlier statements. Much of this echoes and amplifies Le Pen's rhetoric, rather than helping to combat it."

Its completely unreasonable to have such a gargantuan quotation in the article, especially when it is clearly in violation of WP:NPOV, as well as WP:DUEWEIGHT Reflecktor (talk) 11:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


sources

[edit]

It seems to me there are far too many journalistic sources, often based on a sentence or two JLM said and far too few quotations from his many books and articles 2A01:CB08:8BE:AA00:F485:76F2:A8D8:DC0C (talk) 09:09, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A remark

[edit]

The Guardian has published an article inviting French people whose views align with the newspaper's own ideology and assumptions to give their analysis on the current French elections. One of the contributors explains that she voted for Anne Hidalgo, partly or mainly because Hidalgo is an immigrant like herself, and adds: "Most people of my political inclinations voted for Mélenchon, but I couldn’t bring myself to support someone who has an “Accusations of anti-semitism” section on his Wikipedia page".
I just thought I would point that out as a reminder of the need for us to be very careful in biographical articles on living people, that we don't smear them. Mélenchon is clearly and obviously not an anti-Semite, and any person with even a basic understanding of his views understands easily what he meant in the comments that have been misinterpreted against him. But the false accusation itself has led that voter at least to (unthinkingly) assume the worst about him. Aridd (talk) 12:55, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, and most of the section is pretty bad WP:OR. The first paragraph just repeats political attacks by opponents, which were themselves criticized for being cynical. It merits one sentence, if that. The third paragraph is a matter of national policy, and it is WP:OR for us to frame it as antisemitism. The fourth paragraph is about a Jewish organization being criticized for politicizing a tragedy in their attempt to bar Mélenchon from a protest march. The fifth paragraph is about him defending Jeremy Corbyn against critics. Why we frame these as accusations of antisemitism, I have no idea. The sources don't. The last paragraph is better than the rest, but still relies partially on the opinions of political opponents. We should trim and rely on proper scholarly sourcing.
And it's also a WP:CSECTION to structure the article in this way. Either it should go in the chronology, or it should go in a "Public image" section, where that is surely not the only thing to write about. DFlhb (talk) 16:53, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave my comment as is, but reading it again, I can't fully stand behind it. The French article has a longer section on it, with perfectly fine sourcing. I no longer think there's a BLP issue that would merit content removal as opposed to incremental replacement and improvement. DFlhb (talk) 00:38, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UK election results comments

[edit]

@SashiRolls: I believe the source supports the claim:

Jean-Luc Melenchon, a far-left politician from France who is often described as Corbyn’s counterpart there, had a different take [on the British Election result]: On Friday, posting on his Facebook page, Melenchon blamed “networks of influence from Likud,” the Israeli ruling party, before inveighing against French Jews.

I think source is clear that he is saying the result was influenced by the Israeli Likud Party and the French Jews, as I don't see any other way to interpret inveighing against French Jews in this context. Other sources also appear to support this, including the Jewish Chronicle.

Also notifying RAMSES$44932, who added the content eight months ago. BilledMammal (talk) 00:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This makes no sense, the source clearly does not say this and this is a WP:BLP. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the context makes it clear he was inveighing against French Jews in relation to the results of the British election, which supports the claim that they influenced the result. If you disagree, what do you think he was inveighing against them for? BilledMammal (talk) 00:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As is obvious, the context makes no such thing clear. For those of us who actually know what the furore is about, it's related to JLM's criticism of the CRIF, which has absolutely nothing to do with British elections. Nice try. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 11:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As is obvious, the context makes no such thing clear.

Then what is the source saying he is inveighing against French Jews in regards to? Unless your claim is the source is saying he is inveighing against them generally? BilledMammal (talk) 15:59, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Enough badgering. Your partisan link is criticizing Mélenchon for daring to criticize the CRIF. Note that "inveigh" is a partisan way of saying "criticize" and "French Jews" is a way of deceptively over-generalizing a specific criticism of the CRIF to an ethnic group in general, in other words it's a propaganda piece.-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 16:14, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I have understood you correctly; you're saying the source did support the claim added by RAMSES$44932 and restored by me, but that the source is presenting a partisan view and inaccurate view of the situation and shouldn't be used here? BilledMammal (talk) 16:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it's related to JLM's criticism of the CRIF, which has absolutely nothing to do with British elections. that's some selective misreading. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 17:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for misunderstanding you. Can you quote the part of the source that supports your interpretation, as I can't find it? BilledMammal (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are the person wanting to add WP:SYNTH to the article that is not contained in the source. (The fact that the source is pure propaganda is a secondary consideration.) Please show where the source says that Mélenchon said "the election results were influenced by ... the French Jews" as per the wikitext you wish to introduce against consensus. It is not up to me show a negative. You need to demonstrate that you are not distorting the source. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 18:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am at a loss as to why you think that a news article in The Jerusalem Post, a mainstream English language Israeli newspaper with a centrist to center-right editorial position is "pure propaganda ". What the basis for this claim?
Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 20:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because it is demonstrably false. Mélenchon did not "inveigh against French Jews" in general, he criticized the (generally) Pro-Netanyahu CRIF.-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 21:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are not answering my question. If every newspaper claim that turned out to be false (assuming this one is) would mean that the paper in question is "pure propaganda", we'd have no sources to rely on. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are perhaps misunderstanding what I mean by source. The source is this article by Cnan Liphshiz, not the JTA in general. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 21:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I understand you just fine. The source is a newspaper article in the Jerusalem Post, bylined by a journalist who writes for Haaretz, The Times of Israel, The Forward and the JTA, among others. Besides being a gross WP:BLP violation to call him a "pure propaganda" source, the claim seems to be baseless. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 21:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is demonstrably incorrect. The fact that you are trying to claim that I am calling the person a "pure propaganda source" when I'm only referring to the language used in the article speaks volumes. (Oxford definition of propaganda: information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view.)-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know that the article is incorrect, let alone demonstrably so, but even assuming it is, that is not grounds for calling a source "pure propaganda". When you do that, and then further explain that the source you are referring to as "pure propaganda" is a living person, you are violating the BLP policy.
You wisely edited your comment later to refer to the article as propaganda (rather than the person), but still have not explained why it is propaganda which requires intent to mislead (rather than a mistake, or imprecise wording), other than your claim that it is false, based on your personal interpretation that he was referring to CRIF, and a further hair-splitting that a reference to the umbrella organization representing the interests of Jews in France is not a reference to the Jews in France. Pretty weak sauce.
In any case, articles are written based on what reliable sources say, and the JTA and the Jerusalem Post (as publishers) and Lipshiz (as a journalist) are reliable sources. If you want to claim that it contains incorrect info, you need to bring a reliable source that says that, not your personal opinion. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 22:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Every single other source mentioned so far in this discussion (four sources) refer to the CRIF and include direct citations. Zero of these four RS claim that Mélenchon "inveighed against French Jews" in general, much less 'held "the" French Jews responsible for the results of a UK election' (which the source in question does not claim either, but which was added to this entry). We're done here.-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth noting in the context of the now-blocked LTA complaining about discussion of Liphshiz that there were no fewer than three articles by this author in the section on allegations of anti-Semitism, none of which identifying the author. This is a problem of giving undue weight to one point of view. It is interesting to note too that in choosing what to highlight from the article, no mention was made of the fact that it was Bernard-Henri Lévy who was being cited elliptically as "some"... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 07:11, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've already explained why I interpreted the source as I did. You've said you disagree, but you haven't explained your interpretation - you haven't said what you believe the source is saying he was inveighing against French Jews in regards to.
I had thought you were saying that the source was presenting a partisan view and inaccurate view of the situation, and that the source was over-generalizing, but you've since clarified that is not the case. BilledMammal (talk) 18:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your reading is wrong. I bought a shirt in an English shop, before putting on a stylish French beret. does not mean I bought a stylish French beret in an English shop. Enough. (also, the author appears to have a rep for this sort of thing) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree, but it's not worth arguing over - I've added it as a separate statement. (Also, EI is unreliable) BilledMammal (talk) 19:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop. This not only a WP:BLP but an active politician. Stop trying to insist that they are antisemitic with such weak sourcing. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is fuzzy'd up. Mélenchon blamed Likud influence networks and the UK Chief Rabbi (not CRIF/French Jews) for Corbyn's loss. However, he does equate this to the CRIF, denouncing any "genuflexion to the arrogant ukases [read: diktats] of the CRIF communautaristes". Most criticism centred on UK Jewish groups being lumped in with French ones; he is not accused of claiming French Jews influenced UK elections, he's accused of framing it as an international Left versus an international Jewry. Here are some sources: [2][3][4] (The word communautariste, in French politics, refers to perceived allegiance to ethnic/religion-based group identity, and is a pejorative, just to give you the cultural context; it is seen as the construction of an "otherness" that threatens a national unity grounded on allegiance to the Republic as the sole and exclusive group identity; e.g. Muslims who complain of Islamophobia are also accused of communautarisme by the right-wing and far-right). DFlhb (talk) 19:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are better refs. The first brief in Le Monde lists reactions from Mélenchon's political opponents, which try to suggest his remarks were anti-semitic (using words he did not use), whereas the 2nd (Libé) and 3rd (La Croix) specifically state that while Mélenchon is not anti-Semitic, his jumping from an accurate claim about the Chief Rabbi in the UK (La Croix) to what Libé calls justifiable criticism of the CRIF was careless, playing too fast and loose with a sensitive subject. In any case, none of the three talk about "French Jews".-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good way to put it (though I forgot to mention Libé and La Croix also dispute the accuracy of his claims about who was responsible for accusing Corbyn of antisemitism) DFlhb (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Labelling

[edit]

I've removed the label of "far-left" that was added to the lead. There are plenty of sources that call him left-wing, seen here: [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], and [15].

Therefore, to just state far-left is unbalanced. I'm not sure if labelling a person "left-wing to far-left" would be helpful. Personally, I think political positions should be left to the pages of political parties and organisations, rather than people. Therefore, I think the most balanced and neutral thing is probably to include neither label. Helper201 (talk) 08:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are all outdated --FMSky (talk) 20:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The vast majority of these sources are from 2022 with even at least one from 2023. So, they are hardly "outdated". Helper201 (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And the ones from 2024 exclusively call him far left -- --FMSky (talk) 11:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And it's not sure @FMSky:, that you have consensus to add the label you wish to add to this BLP. Remember that WP:BRD is particularly worth keeping in mind on WP:BLP pages. I suspect you'll find that if you look at French sources, a significant number do not follow your POV. Please do not begin another editwar, but wait for a consensus to emerge as to whether we should include both left-wing and the newly-fashionable far-left label or if we should include neither. I do grant that your addition of an article to your ref-stack from the "Domestic Correspondent on the Obituaries desk" is full of wry humour. :) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:17, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ffs, You were also the guy who brickwalled the National Rally article for no reason whatsoever. Move on please, hes far left, there's not much more to say, just accept it please --FMSky (talk) 08:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For those unaware, eleven people have disagreed with FMSky in an RfC about the subject of the edit-warring mentioned above. I was not involved in that editwar (zero reverts), I simply compiled the diffs. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 09:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree; Melenchon has been characterized as "far left" by reliable sources for years, and it is past time we include that information. BilledMammal (talk) 22:35, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When you've succeeded in adding far-right to the opening sentence of Jordan Bardella and Marine Le Pen's BLP we can discuss this.-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The content of those articles isn't relevant to the question of what is WP:DUE in this article. I'm not involved with either of them, but I encourage you to open a discussion about adding that label. BilledMammal (talk) 22:39, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe it's particularly helpful to add labels to people's pages, so I won't be doing that. However, if you succeed, come back and let us know that you succeeded in changing the status quo. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:43, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the descriptor to the 3rd sentence and added "often described as" --FMSky (talk) 12:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sources from 2022 and prior, describe him as left-wing overwhelmingly. We shouldn't skew the article with a short-term perspective WP:RECENTISM. Although a compromise would be to state he is left-wing in the lede but expand on the recent coverage in the § Political positions section that he is "often described as" far-left by some observers. — hako9 (talk) 12:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On French Wikipedia, the sentence was removed, even though it said he was considered « left-wing, potentially even far-left ». The lede is not the right place to «class» living persons, it’s not recommended. I remember the section Political Positions had a sentence similar to "seen as left-wing or far-left", which is accurate.
There is still no consensus to call him far-left, with many French media recently explicitly stating he is not. (I will give you links for 20 minutes, Yahoo, RFI, Le Monde, TF1, which asked a historian who nonetheless argues that «LFI uses confusion», Le nouvel Obs), heck some of those media did call him far-left previously, and have a right-leaning orientation (20 minutes for exemple), these things are popping up everywhere since the question of "equaling" National Rally And LFI was an important matter in the last election. So rather, sources are somewhat changing their opinion, and went from calling it far-left to calling it radical left or just left. These sources are just two weeks old and concern the last election and the European election. Melenchon is considered either left-wing or far-left, and that info is not for the lede but for the section Political positions. 2003:EE:6F16:4F61:48A8:70CE:A744:5DEF (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another example of refusing talk page consensus to insert "far left" in the first line of the lede: diff. This was due to a line in "political positions" which did not include the adverb "sometimes" present in the original: Si la presse l’assimile parfois à l’« extrême gauche » ou à la « gauche radicale », lui a toujours refusé ces étiquettes. Mélenchon n’a en effet rien d’un « gauchiste » : entre 1997 et 2002, il a soutenu inconditionnellement la « gauche plurielle » au pouvoir[.] -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 10:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitic

[edit]

Mélenchon is openly a far left,antisemitic politician. You should add that. 2A06:C701:4F3B:ED00:98FE:28A1:9E38:7192 (talk) 03:57, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not openly, stop trolling. 80.187.70.140 (talk) 04:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jean-Luc_Mélenchon&oldid=1247813051"