Talk:Peter Caruana

message: The following line has been removed pending evidence to support it:
"As a young boy he had an accident with a slingshot from which resulted in him needing a glass eye."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.199.238 (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of slingshot claim 

message: I removed this section for review and rewrite as it mentioned disputes, but lacked information as to their subject.
:I also removed the entire trivia section as inappropriate in various ways. Labelling a statement that someone only has sight in one eye as trivia strikes me as offensive.  If the type of car information has any relevance, that needs to be made clear.  Labelling someone's background as trivia is rude at best. 
:I also removed some references pending further checking as to their relationship to the removed section, and the 2nd photo, nice though it is, as being one photo too many to fit in the present short article.  Wanderer57 (talk) 11:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very true.  I've added some more background information.  It would seem that this page has been vandalised recently. --Gibnews (talk) 22:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re removal of controversy section 

message: The wording has been changed to:
"The GSD which he now leads, is robustly against any transfer of sovereignty to Spain, but remains in favour of safe dialogue"
Instead of "uncompromised dialogue".  The wording in the reference beside the sentence is "Reasonable dialogue".
Wouldn't if be better to use "Reasonable dialogue" than "safe dialogue"?
Wanderer57 (talk) 00:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Peter Caruana used both terms extensively in news broadcasts, perhaps its better to say safe and reasonable. With a bit more time and effort I can dig up better references.  --Gibnews (talk) 12:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's better to use the term there is a specific reference for.  Wanderer57 (talk) 12:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I took another look. That source doesn't quote Caruana at all.  ??  Wanderer57 (talk) 12:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at the large banner at the end which says 'NO in principle concessions against our wishes - yes to reasonable dialogue' The wording at the end is a statement issued by Caruana.  --Gibnews (talk) 12:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "safe dialogue"? 

message: I'm wondering about sources that were and are being used for this article.  Vox, Panorama, and Gibnet.
I don't want to offend anyone by asking this, but is there any possibility that these are "biased" sources?  Representing particular interests?
Understand, I'm not saying they are; I'm just asking the question.
Wanderer57 (talk) 00:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Vox is on a bitter crusade against Peter Caruana and attacks him on every level. The editor of 'New People' is in litigation. The other Gibraltar news media are reasonably unbiased.  I have a hand in gibnet.com and the documents presented in the reference section there are 'as published'.  The site is cited by the House of Commons library as a source of Gibraltar related documents. --Gibnews (talk) 12:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of Gibraltar Sources 

message: The reference now given after the words "much to the annoyance of Peter Hain" is about pension arrangements, not about bi-lateral talks.
Thus it is not a good reference IMO.
I understand that a connection I am missing might be obvious to someone more versed in Gibraltar-UK-Spain relationships.
However, since this is meant to be a general encyclopedia, references that require this much reading between the lines are not helpful.  Are there some  sources that are more directly relevant?  Wanderer57 (talk) 01:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I take your point, however Hain expressed his annoyance in the rejection of the joint sovereignty concept he promoted by telling some big lies about Gibraltar, as evidenced by that reference. --Gibnews (talk) 12:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Your interpretation of the reference may well be true. However, since interpretation is required to get from "point A to point B", I have removed the "much to the annoyance" clause.  Wanderer57 (talk) 12:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Much to the annoyance of 

message: 'Gibraltarian Roman Catholics' is indeed a subcategory of 'Gibraltarian people'.  As I understand it, in the Wikipedia category system, a person who is in both a category and a subcategory is supposed to be tagged by the subcategory.  Because the subcategory is more defining, it conveys more information.  Wanderer57 (talk) 19:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re reverted edit to category 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Peter Caruana. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070701225546/http://www.gibraltar.gov.gi/chief_minister/chief_minister_index.htm to http://www.gibraltar.gov.gi/chief_minister/chief_minister_index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:56, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified