Talk:Philippe Moureaux

Biography: Politics and Government / Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Belgium Low‑importance

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Translation notice

This article is an abridgement of fr:Philippe Moureaux. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moria Scolas, a civil servant form Molenbeek, the town of mayor Philippe Moureaux

Political interference in an article Philippe Moureaux No vandalism in Moureaux, except from mister Mario Scolas, a civil servant WORKING for Philippe Moureaux, mayor of Sint-Jans-Molenbeek, see http://www.psmolenbeek.be/Liste.htm. At the bottom appears the name of Mister Scolas. Do you really think his interventions can be 'objective' if he is a civil servant working for the POLITICAL PARTY of the MAYOR ?

Look, it's very obvious that you care a lot about this. You obviously feel your criticism of this guy is deserved. Frankly, I have no idea about his politics or your criticism and I doubt that the other editors do, either. The problem is, you are stuck in an edit war and your criticism is never going to be heard unless you learn how to rephrase it in a tone that matches this encyclopedia. It is your phrasing, not your criticism, that is causing editors to assume you are a vandal instead of someone with a valid concern.

So, do you really want your voice to be heard, or do you want to just keep banging your head against the wall?

If you want to make an edit that isn't going to get reverted, you need to rephrase your criticism so it fits the format of an encyclopedia. Don't talk about "his hatred of anything Flemish," but cite how his policies are detrimental to the Flemish people. Don't warble about "what he thinks of as a nightmare," but instead dig up quotes from him about what he feels about a Flemish presence in Brussels (you're not a mind reader - none of us know what someone "thinks"). And for God's sake, if you want to be taken seriously, don't whine about the guy's mustache! Frankly, I think the guy elected president in my country looks like a chimpanzee, but I'd rather comment on his detrimental policies than his appearance.

Take a look at Karl Rove or Bill Clinton if you want to see how to write a critical article. Also, marking it in a dedicated section labeled "criticism" goes a long way to avoiding reverts by other editors. Try placing your edits on this talk page and asking for help in how to phrase it. I guarantee that you'll have people helping you come up with an edit that leaves your criticism intact.

Additionally (and I apologize if I'm lecturing you), getting an account instead of editing anonymously goes a long way to getting your comments treated with respect. The reality is that editors who see critical remarks without properly formatted citations (see Wikipedia:Footnote for how to do that) from anonymous editors are going to assume vandalism first.

Finally, don't modify other peoples user pages! If you want to leave me a comment, do it at User_talk:KNHaw, not User:KNHaw. When editors see people modifying others' user pages instead of talk pages, the assumption is that its vandalism, not discussion.

Good luck. --KNHaw ^(talk) 17:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality ????

Moureaux is thought to feel deep hatred towards the Flemings and being obsessed with the idea of Brussels getting Flemish (flamandisation, Flemishing), which is actually not the case statistically. In the Flemish newspaper Het Nieuwsblad, Flemish minister Bert Anciaux quoted by fds on 2 May 2005, for instance described his encounter with Philippe Moureaux: Moureaux was "extremely chilly" ("uiterst ijzig") to Anciaux and "Only with very much difficulty, he was willing to hold out his hand to me. He calls himself a socialist. But in his speech for 1 May, he choose to attack the Flemings rather than the extreme right. Moureaux was talking about the Flemishing of Brussels. Such a comedy. I would laugh about it, if it had not been so serious." (in Dutch: "Slechts met veel moeite wou hij mij de hand reiken. Hij noemt zichzelf een socialist. Maar in zijn 1 mei-toespraak valt hij liever de Vlamingen aan dan extreem-rechts. Moureaux had het in zijn toespraak over 'La flamandisation de Bruxelles'. Wat een komedie. Ik zou erom lachen indien het niet zo ernstig was.")