Discussiun:François Asselineau

Cross wiki spamming

Hello,

I apologize to have to write in English here.

The corresponding French article is currently being discussed for deletion, after having been deleted by a very strong majority two years ago.

The key points of this discussion are :

• there exist now some secondary sources, and some of them focus on him, such as the article in Marianne (typically), and now On n'est pas couché on France 2 (10 days ago), with these comments;
• however, independant sources of good standing are still rare. So, because François Asselineau has a cyber activist team (about 100 people, headed by Marvin Leroy), spamming and non neutral additions keep coming in large numbers, and even on the French Wikipédia, we fear not to be able to contain it to maintain a balanced article.
  The cross wiki spamming - with over 90 stubs created by François Asselineau's Internet activists (a lot of which have now been deleted) - is proof of this Internet activism; hence the fear that neutral, balanced articles will be extremely difficult to maintain; even the English article is strongly biased, with favorable facts blown out of all proportion, and negative points "forgotten".

So, the current discussion on the French "deletion page" (AfD) centers on this : are the existing sources strong enough to resist spamming and non neutral additions?

For the time being, a majority believe the notability of François Asselineau is not enough to take the risk.

Best regards. --Azurfrog (talk) 10:43, 4 october 2014 (CEST)

Hello Azurfrog, thanks for your comment. Since our community is very small (currently I'm almost alone, some others post articles but don't discuss), I think I will follow the discussion on the German Wikipedia (we mostly follow their set of rules and policies, except for local topics) and take a decision based on theirs. Once the local community grows again and they challenge my decision, I'm of course ready to have a new discussion. --Andreas (talk) 20:28, 6 october 2014 (CEST)

If the German article is to be kept, I might finish translating the new version without the mentioned "Lobhudelei" (gratuitous flattery and praise). --Andreas (talk) 20:34, 6 october 2014 (CEST)

Hello Andreas !

As you may have seen in the German "Löschdiskussion", I basically agree with the comments of Yen Zotto, all the more as he has some knowledge of local politics. He also rightfully pointed out that none of Asselineau's jobs were elected functions, so that compliance with German RK was borderline, as it is with French notability guidelines. As for the French "LA" currently under "Löschdiskussion", it is felt by a majority that :

"Borderline notability + severe POV-pushing + harassment of media to get coverage = Delete."

Regards. --Azurfrog (talk) 15:17, 8 october 2014 (CEST)

By the way, the French article is much more neutral, as it has been reviewed and edited by 90 to 100 different people, after carefully reading all the currently identified sources. --Azurfrog (talk) 15:26, 8 october 2014 (CEST)

The english and german Wikipedia decided to keep this article and some other Wikipedias too. --Howan Hansi (talk) 19:53, 19 november 2014 (CET)

Cross wiki spamming

For information - Regards --Lomita (talk) 21:36, 14 october 2014 (CEST)