Talk:Bart De Wever

message: The controversy section puts undue weight on two minor issues that were exaggerated, short-lived and irrelevant when concerning BDW's political career. The big titles give the impression that these issues define his political career or political ideas, which they clearly don't. So therefore, I removed the separate titles. 193.190.253.146 (talk) 22:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Undue weight

message: the above comments are probably right, in that the article doesn t talk about the main issue he is known for: his distate for the country of Belgium itself and his preference for a progressive dissolution of Belgium within Europe, leaving two independent regions behind (not three!), meaning Brussels would be negated the separate regional status it currently has (June 2010).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.74.138.22 (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: De Wever has regularly stated that he is in favour of establishing a Condominium (international law) for Brussels. --Keffertje08 (talk) 10:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Views 

message: I would like to propose that the picture currently used for the Wiki page about Bart De Wever be replaced by a more recent photo.  There has been a lot of attention paid lately to Mr. De Wever's successful diet, and his new slim appearance astonished me greatly when I first saw it in a photo a few weeks ago.  He has even edited a cookbook which has been very well received in Belgium.  I have a picture that I like, but I don't know how to make sure that there are no copyright issues.  Can anyone help?  Tim Carmell (talk) 18:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vermagering 

message: Karel Dillen is not described as a nazi in neither en, fr, nl or de Wikipedia, nor in his obituary in the Belgian mainstream newspaper De Standaard. It's fair to describe him as far-right and founder of Vlaams Blok, which is sufficient to place him politically. He translated a revisionist book in 1951, so there is some support to the claim he is or has been a holocaust denier, although it's a long time back. Obviously the "controversies" section is meant to portray Bart De Wever negatively. The facts are interesting and should be moved to the proper sections, and kept if they are really substantial controverses in the public debate in Belgium - but if they are not controversies they shouldn't be mentioned, at least not under that headline. There is also more to the context of De Wever's criticism of the mayor of Antwerp. De Wever said the mayor's apology was 'gratuit' and came far too late to be taken seriously. De Wever: "Excuses zijn gratuit omdat ze zo laat komen" --Sasper (talk) 15:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversies

message: Bart De Wever has been repeatedly hospitalized in recent months. Doctors have been cautious about the cause, but speak of a "condition" (involving the pericardium) that takes some months to clear up. Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illness  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bart De Wever. 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  tag to http://www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/news/111206_oath
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071101035528/http://www.ejpress.org:80/article/21323 to http://www.ejpress.org/article/21323
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) 19:23, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Please be patient with me as I am only a minor contributor to Wikipedia and I think this is only my second or third contribution to a talk page. Nobody has ever shown me how talk pages work, so maybe I am committing some major faux pas here.
Anyway, I found this text in the "Panda suits" section:
"Nevertheless, because those pandas are initially gifts from the People's Republic of China, it would be impolite to refuse them. They are also cost-effective in the short term.[22]"
Apart from the small grammar issues, which make the meaning of "would" a little tricky, my main concern is that this information is essentially irrelevant, especially as phrased.  Maybe it would be slightly better if this was stated in the context of De Wever's TV appearance, e.g. "It was pointed out to him that".  But even then it doesn't seem very relevant.  He protested against the acquisition of the pandas; arguments about the merits of that acquisition do not help us learn much about Bart De Wever, especially since those arguments are phrased in the form of an opinion.  But I am reluctant to simply delete these two sentences as it seems rather presumptuous to do so unilaterally.
Conflict of interest declaration: none.  I do not care very much either way about Bart De Wever or pandas. :-)
STeamTraen (talk) 19:34, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Panda suits