Talk:Fredrik Reinfeldt

message: This is notable, is it? Or it particularly foreshadows his future or indicates his character? I think not. Just because something can be sourced doesn't mean it ought to be included. If you were to ask me, we need less of that kind of thing in the article, not more. Harfarhs (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  His secondary education major?? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Fredrik Reinfeldt. 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/20090301060358/http://www.thelocal.se:80/7333/20070517/ to http://www.thelocal.se/7333/20070517/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:09, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Checked by Pipetricker (talk) 12:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm not sure we should have a criticism section in this page.  Every public figure is subject to criticism, but unless it is extremely wounding (for example corruption allegations), it is not on the page of the public figure.  For instance, neither Trump nor Obama have criticism sections on their pages.  It also seems like, even if a criticism section would be good, the current one doesn't have much merit.  It uses very ideological words ("Sell out" and such) and instead just lists off articles in newspapers that dislike Reinfeldt with what they are criticizing him of.  This would be strange to do for any public figure and doesn't really add anything to the article.  I can assume Reinfeldt has critics.
:Trump does not have a single criticism page, he has a category of them. Obama does not have an analogous section, but that's because each of his policies (such as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) have their own sections for criticisms (and this is also true for Trump). For extremely well-known figures such as US Presidents, it makes sense not to have a single section, as the issues they campaign for or oppose are highly controversial and complex (likewise for other major world leaders, such as Boris Johnson and Xi Jinping. However, this section on premier politicians who are not of global importance is not unprecedented, such as for Angela Merkel, and a similar section serving much the same purpose ("Image and perception") exists for Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, though this is uncommon. I think in these cases (and here), the issue is whether there is a) sufficient controversy to warrant its own section (to this end, I think the answer is that the criticisms levelled at Reinfeldt are both apposite and pertinent), and/or b) enough criticism throughout the article to warrant a neutral point of view that would make such a section redundant. In the latter case, and in this specific instance, I believe that this issue has arisen as the article doesn't broadly discuss his policies while in his premiership, but instead tends to focus on the contemporaneous electoral campaigns. All that said, I do agree that the section is heavily biased, and so I have rewritten it to be more neutral. I will not replace it on the page immediately as I'd like your thoughts on it, but I think it's sufficient as-is to replace what currently exists, in the absence of a greater overall article rewrite. Here is my proposed revision:
::Reinfeldt has received criticism around many of his views and activities, and has been characterised as espousing anti-Swedish commentary, such as the phrase "Swedish culture is pure barbarism" [60] while Prime Minister in November 2006. In 1993, Reinfeldt published Det sovande folket, a political book discussing various political views of the Moderate Youth League [link], which have been described as radically neoliberal [63]. Reinfeldt previously denied authoring the book when criticised, but later acknowleged writing it, calling it a "sin of the youth".
::While in government, some of Reinfeldt's policies have come under heavy criticism for increasing privatisation in elderly care, schooling, and pharmacies [65], as well as supporting increasing the retirement age to 75, and further if possible [66]. Right-wing newspaper Fria Tider criticised his statement that "Sweden belongs to immigrants, not Swedes", and similar sentiments have been echoed by liberal paper Blekinge Läns Tidning [69] and  Henrik Lilja of ProjektSanning. In 2009, Reinfeldt passed the Ipred-lagen, an online privacy law designed to protect Swedish file sharers from the authorities. In 2017, Breakit, a Swedish technology-focussed magazine, allege that Reinfeldt did not publicly disclose that the law also empowered private corporations to force internet service providers to release identifiable data regarding suspected users [71]. 
::In June 2016, AktuelltFokus reported that, after leaving politics, Reinfeldt has continued to receive monthly payments from taxpayers of 156 000 SEK (then 18 000 USD) per month [74], while in 2017, Dina Pengar reported that his own company generated revenue of 22 million SEK (2.5 million USD) in 2016 [75]. The liberal editorial Dalarnas Tidningar (DT) published an article in November 2016 lambasting Reinfeldt for his statement calling Swedes to "open their hearts" [72], alleging that his programme of increasing refugee immigration conflicted with his defence of stringent employee protection [73]. 
:Any thoughts welcome. Xorwire (talk) 14:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism Section