Talk:Theo van Gogh (film director)

message: I have decided to take down the Assasination picture. It should not be shown in full at all on the biography page. It is distasteful  as well a few people I have spoken with have complained about itSatanical Eve 21:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Assasination picture

message: removed this text: (911 days after the assassination of Pim Fortuyn).  Unless someone connected with the murder says otherwise, this is coincidence and numerology which reflects poorly on Wikipedia. silsor 22:52, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)
:Good work. Note by the way that he was killed on 11/2, which is the alarm number in the Netherlands and Europe in general. -- Solitude\talk 11:30, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
::Except that the Dutch use dates in dd-mm-yyyy format, so it becomes 2-11. mvdhout 12:07, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Date coincidence

message: This is probably nitpicking but for the sake of accuracy, was it actually in front of the stadsdeelkantoor or just near it? The stadsdeelkantoor is like 100 m away from the corner with Mauritskade. Rkundalini
:From the maps I've seen it seems he was first attacked right in front of it. Note though that he tried to ran away as well, I believe his body was not found in front of the stadsdeelkantoor. -- Solitude\talk 11:33, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)
::As I recall, he was cycling, got shot, moved on foot to the other side of the road, where he was again attacked, and died. I'm not familiar with the local situation, but I believe it is opposite to the 'stadsdeelkantoor'. mvdhout 12:10, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Theo van Gogh was attacked in front of the stadsdeelkantoor on Linnaeusstraat 89, fled accross the street and died on the corner of Linnaeusstraat and Tweede Oosterparkstaat. Vinny 19:53, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Location 

message: the article so far states he was "shot to death" while in fact he seems to have also been stabbed. i have read at least 2 sources (incl. the local amsterdam news paper on the day of the murder) that mention his throat was slit. is this relevant enough to mention and do others have confirmation from other sources?
:he was stabbed around 20 times, shot several times, and had his head nearly decapitated by a edged weapon. all this is according to CNN. Alkivar 01:04, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  so then the question is; is this relevant for the main article? should it be mentioned there? 217.79.38.87 12:07, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont think so, the details of his death dont add much. We know he's dead, we know he was murdered, do we really need the gruesome details? Alkivar 00:14, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it is important.  JFK was shot by a gunman who ran away after the shooting, Lincoln was shot in the back of the head by someone who then jump on to stage publicly and ran off, theo was shot multiple times, had his throat slit, stabbed several times in the chest and was left with a knife in his chest pinning a note to him (as i understand it, i don't speak Dutch so i can only read the english articles i can find.)  there is clearly a differnce in the ammount of violance here.  this wasn't just an assassination, this was a message that the perpatrator was trying to convey. Cavebear42 16:30, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stabs 

message: I'm very sad that such a person was murdered. In a world full of PC crap..where everyone caters to everyone else, I enjoy the refreshing ideals of Theo.
:Just because this category is here:  I was wondering if his opinions were ever respected? I mean the article says he justified saying "geitenneukers" against Muslims because of the teachings of Khomeini... I mean, I suppose he missed the Shia/Sunni disinction.  I know very little about him but was he seen as a well educated man or a man who would tend to just try to be perverse having little clue of reality (as that statement makes it seem). gren
His own fault. He offend alot of people.WTF does he expect? For them all to not give a shit?
OK so you mean he deserved to die because he protected european values when it comes to womens rights? You should have your brain checked up, actually theres really no point to, since you dont have one. Furious Stormrage
Murder is never justified. Remember that. Amused Himself to Death 22:46, 17 October (UTC)
:Us humans aren't consistent with that. I think that's just a matter of who's doing the killing and who's getting killed. (Antonio.sierra 04:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murder 

message: I find the attention given to the police destruction of the public artwork pretty exceturated and it should imho be bound in, this feels like a matter of opinion; not fit for an encyclopedia. I have not removed it myself, since i felt the author/maintainer of the page should consider this for him/herself.
:Why should mentioning the facts around the destruction of the public artwork be POV? The artwork and its destruction has caught A LOT of media attention, and is surely worth mentioning.. IMHO the "Aftermath" section should (hopefully!) be expanded and not reduced. Stereotek 23:59, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the Aftermath 

message: Can we have some links or evidence that there is some dispute that he not a descendant of Vincent's brother before we authoritatively state that in the intro?  Should be easy enough to trace someone in a direct line back just 4 generations. Gamaliel 20:04, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There's absolutely no dispute whatsoever. See  for details of the relationship of Theo & Vincent van Gogh. - Nunh-huh 02:21, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Self-proclaimed" descendant? 

message: The dutch government, law enforcement agencies and the national news seem to differ:
http://www.nos.nl/nieuws/artikelen/2005/2/7/ledenhofstadgroepvoorderechter.html
(in Dutch)
quote: "Leden van de Hofstadgroep zouden ook contact hebben gehad met Mohammed B., de verdachte van de moord op Theo van Gogh. 
Twee van de radicale moslimjongeren werden een week na die moord in het Haagse Laakkwartier opgepakt. Dat gebeurde na een belegering door de politie, die de hele dag duurde."
You might be interested in this letter, written by the Dutch ministers of Justice and the Interior: 
http://www.regering.nl/Images/briefplusbijlagen_tcm42-50573.doc
(In Dutch) , I do not think there is any reason to revisit this point. --Isolani 19:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These links are now dead. But this article might shed some light on the subject. It is also in English. In this article it is made clear that Bouyeri was a member of the Hofstadgroup. It might be worthwhile to point out that the verdict in the case of Bouyeri, which was extreme under Dutch law, was not appealed. It might also be useful to point out that for people like Bouyeri, prison is seen as a recruiting ground, not punishment. Finally I would like to point out that Bouyeri has stated that he does not regret his actions nor has he shown any signs of remorse.  JHvW 21:51, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Hofstadgroup not radicals ? 

message: Cut from article:
:The movie was perceived by the Islamic community as an inaccurate perception of Islamic teachings.
According to whom? And more to the point, which elements of the Islamic community formed this perception? And which Islamic teachings did these people say van Gogh inaccurately portrayed in the film?
As is, this statement is unattributed POV masquerading as fact.
Secondly, what was the point of van Gogh's film?
*that the Koran tells Islamic people it's okay to "abuse" woman (by Western standards); or,
*that men in Islamic societies (i.e., men who ostensibly follow the Koran's teachings) abuse women despite Koranic teachings; or,
*that regardless of what the Koran may or may not teach, women are getting badly mistreated?
My personal impression is that Islamic society is selfish and violent, and that anyone who exposes this self-centered violence is liable to be bullied into submission. But the question for us Wikipedia contributors here is, how to describe Islam's reaction to van Gogh's criticisms. Was he murdered for branding Islamic men as murderous, womanizing bullies? (Ironically, proving his point!) Or what? Let's be as objective as we can in this article, please. --Uncle Ed 14:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My impression was that it was the first option, as he utilized actual Koranic verses to make his point.  TheKaplan 14:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Submission film

message: While I understand the reasoning behind changing the wording to the active voice in order to emphasize the murderer Bouyeri, it seems to me that the passive voice is more appropriate to an artile about Theo van Gogh, because he is the subject of the sentences. Consider: "Theo van Gogh was murdered by Mohammed Bouyeri."  This focuses on Van Gogh, as the article should. Next: "Mohammed Bouyeri murdered Theo van Gogh."  This focuses on Bouyeri, and seems more appropriate for his own article.  TheKaplan 03:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Passive vs active voice

message: I really don't think the far-right-wing Moonie-controlled Washington Times is a credible source in any situation, let alone this case as regards the supposed "majority of under-14's in major Dutch cities are Islamic" and similar claims, especially as according to the CIA World Factbook Muslims make up only 5.5% of the total Dutch population. The Washington Times article in question is a commentary piece and quotes statistics without reference to any sort of study. This is thoroughly unencyclopaedic. Unless this claim can be substantiated by a more impartial and mainstream source it should not be in the article. JF Mephisto 02:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed major Dutch cities/Washington Times claim

message: Isn't there a way to incorporate the current trend towards self-blame into the article? By doing so, it could be shown that van Gogh brought on his own death and that Bouyeri is totally and absolutely not responsible for his alleged actions. Lestrade 02:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why do they hate us?

message: Ok after studying this i found 2 meanings of the word Islam:
#literal meaning: peace or give peace as a verb.
#implied meaning:submission and outward conforming with law of God  <<Smart_Viral 01:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of the word Islam 

message: As van Gogh's son is a minor and has been threatened himself (Theo van Gogh (film director)#Aftermath)), we should remove his name completely from the article as per WP:BLP. -- Túrelio 07:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one objected, today I've removed all mentions of his name from the article. -- Túrelio 16:08, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Although it is sensitive to have removed the son from the article there is now a different problem. His son is no longer a minor and is very outspoken about his fathers death. A Dutch journalist interviewed the son in 2014 for a Dutch newspaper (Vrij Nederland). The journalist won an award (De Tegel, category interview) for the interview. JHvW 21:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Van Gogh's son

message: Theo van Gogh has  certainly become an emblem of free speech, since he was murdered for speaking, but was he himself an activist for free speech? Salman Rushdie, for instance, has given multiple talks about freedom of expression since being targeted. But van Gogh's article/biography doesn't mention that sort of activity from him. If he was not an activist, per se, then we should delete the category :Category:Free speech activists category. In that case, perhaps a category about "Free speech controversies" or "Speech-related violence" would be appropriate. --Lquilter (talk) 17:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Free speech activists category

message: Seems to be written by a Dutch person here, as the Dutch cognate 'nihilistisch' simply means 'devoid of interest in life' in common speech yet has retained its original meaning in academic circles. In English however, nihilism still exclusively means the philosophical propositions wither the link points. I don't think the propositions listed there describe Van Gogh, a moralist, very adequately. Rajakhr (talk) 19:02, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Nihilist' 

message: The article should discuss his films other than the one paragraph in the section Life and the film Submission. Perhaps his influence as a film maker and the American remakes Interview (2007) and Blind Date (2008) can be discussed too. Rubenescio (talk) 10:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Film maker 

message: The section Van Gogh's murder and Index on Censorship is cloned in Index on Censorship#Theo van Gogh controversy and Rohan Jayasekera (writer)#Theo van Gogh. It would be better to decide for one article and link there from the others. I wanted to link to WP:DRY but that rule doesn't seem to exist -- well it should.--87.162.0.50 (talk) 18:32, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Index on censorship" clones 

message: The aftermath section needs citations, especially about reactions. If nobody finds any, it needs to be cleaned of "some dutch people" statements.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.124.55.89 (talk) 01:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations in Aftermath 

message: I've noticed extensively in this article (and in articles that link to it or otherwise touch on the same event, such as Criticism of Islam) that van Gogh's demise is referred to as an assassination rather than a murder. I was always under the impression that assassination refers to the intentional killing of a political or religious leader; van Gogh certainly doesn't seem to fit this criteria simply because he was a critic of islam. To me, it feels as if theres a vague undertone in the use of assassinated that sides with the people who think that the killing was wrong; while I completely agree that it was wrong, it does not feel neutral to me, as all wikipedia articles should. Or am I just nit-picking?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.243.95 (talk) 23:25, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also uncomfortable with the prevalence of the term "assassination" in relation to Van Gogh. "Murder" is far more accurate.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 22:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the term "assassinated" 

message: I read this article because of the news about the recent South Park episode. It is not correct that the murderer decapitated (or "nearly" decapitated) Theo van Gogh and I removed this error from the article. KathaLu (talk) 05:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Look into it more especially if you are going to edit the article. It was an attempted decapitation as mentioned in numerous sources (one of which I have added). Cptnono (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had looked into it before I edited the article, in particular in reliable Dutch sources, including, but not only, the well researched Dutch Wikipedia article on the murder of Theo van Gogh. The murderer cut his throat, and that's it. Throwing in "decapitation", "nearly decapitated him" or "tried to decapitate him" makes it more sensational, but not factual. I know that you can find plenty of sites on the web, or even newspaper articles that have this claim, again, it does not make it so.KathaLu (talk) 17:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: When numerous sources say that he attempted to then we have verification. That is the benchmark for inclusion. Cptnono (talk) 15:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, that's how Wikipedia works, lol. I will let it go now. Everybody knows that there are numerous mistakes in Wikipedia, some less important than others. In the shortened version of the charges at the beginning of the judgement of the Dutch court in the van Gogh case, there is no mention of decapitation at all. What I could find, and what I regard as official first hand original reliable sources (NOT some newspaper articles found through Google), is the transcript of the prosecutor's charges ("requisitoir") which mentioned "(4) sawing movements" of the murderer, seen by one witness, and "at least 4 sawing movements to cut his throat" in the autopsy report. Of course people tried to put this into relation to decapitation but the prosecutor goes only so far and makes only the following reference to decapitation (my translation): "The cutting of Van Gogh's throat makes one think of the decapitations which regularly take place in the Middle East, in particular during the war in Chetchenia, Afghanistan and Iraq ..... and by cutting his throat, the accused wanted to let the people of the Netherlands know that the time has come that this should also happen in the Netherlands."  KathaLu (talk) 05:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Many newspapers are considered reliable sources. If you have a problem with that you might want to take it up at the Village Pump but I doubt that will be changing anytime soon.Cptnono (talk) 19:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death 

message: Van Gogh was condemned and fined for antisemitic claims in 1991. he stated in the magazine Moviola : "Fornicating yellow stars in a gas chamber.... What a smell of caramel today. Today the crematoriums burn only diabetic [in Dutch literally: sugar-sick] Jews".
Critized by the jewish historian Evelien Gans, he answered :  "I suspect that Ms Gans gets wet dreams about being fucked by Dr Mengele." Very witty, isn't it ?
Plus he befriend and supported the anti-immigrant political lead Pim Fortuyn.
I don't know if Van Gogh was a "real" antisemitic or a "real" fascist or just an alcoholic big mouth, but his statements are at the least controversial, and deserved to be mentioned.
This article seems to depict him as a martyr of free-speech killed by the fascist muslims, and a defensor of women. It can hardly be that so, since he claimed that "Maybe a man who really beats them up is actually very attractive to some ladies." and supported the exclusion of Somali women victims of mutilation.
Stot (talk) 22:51, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Quotes or stories need full citations (author, title, publication, date) to be included in the article.  Not sure that "Moviola" is a reliable source (RS) as defined by WP.Parkwells (talk) 00:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  antisemitic claims and so on 

message: RE: Very careless handling of near-contemporary facts. 
:In August 2004, after the movie's broadcast on Dutch public TV, the newspaper De Volkskrant reported that the journalist Francisco van Jole had accused Hirsi Ali and Van Gogh of plagiarism,[citation needed] saying that they had appropriated the ideas of Iranian-American video artist Shirin Neshat, whose work used Arabic text projected onto bodies. After Submission was broadcast, Van Gogh and Hirsi Ali received death threats. Van Gogh did not take the threats seriously and refused any protection. According to Hirsi Ali, he said, "Nobody kills the village idiot", a term he frequently used in self reference.[2] 
* A paragraph must contain internally-related material. 
:In writing any paragraph, the author needs to consider whether it hangs together. 
::It can be linear narrative: He went here, did that, stopped here, did that, saw them, did that, etc. 
::Or it can be making a point.  In which case, the point is stated first. 
::Events that are not closely linked, but have some link, need a statement that links them. 
::Unrelated stuff, jammed into the same paragraph, because of time-frame can be confusing, or just plain misleading. 
*The information here is seriously misleading about a very serious topic. 
:Jamming information about "a challenge of plagiarism", and information about "death threats" into the same paragraph, just because they both followed the publication of the book is extraordinarily thoughtless. 
*What did the journalist Francisco van Jole and the video artist Shirin Neshat have to do with the "death threats"?  Absolutely nothing!!! 
::Then why are they in the same paragraph? 
*Writing a report like this is not simply about telling a linear narrative. 
::i.e. You can't say:  "First he published the book, second he got challenged with plagiarism, third he got death threats, fourth he got murdered." 
::If we go back to IQ TEST, year 7, then you must answer this question:    Which one of these statement is the odd one out?  
::The odd one out, obviously, is the challenge of plagiarism..  
::Yes, it happened. No, it doesn't belong in a paragraph dealing with death threats.  Not unless van Jole and Shirin Neshat wrote the death threats.  
::I am almost certain that neither of them had anything to do with it whatsoever. I am equally certain that both would be aghast to find that their association with a matter of intellectual property had been the starting sentence to a paragraph about death threats. 
* The bottom line is: The death threats were a separate matter to the matter of plagiarism, and should never have been contained in the same paragraph, with the second (death threats) hanging on the first (an accusation of plagiarism). 
::One of these matters led to a brutal murder. 
::The other may have led to court and a monetary settlement, if Ms Neshat decided to pursue the matter. 
* Please take on board the comments that I have made here,  if you are going to continue writing about events such as murder, terrorism, court cases, etc. 
* READ what you write, after you have written, and THINK about every sentence, including how it relates to those around it.
* Writing this sort of stuff demands far more care than most types of article do! 
Amandajm (talk) 05:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: To the editors of this page

message: I think the Aftermath section of the article should mention the generally exhuberant reactions to the murder of Muslim youth in the Netherlands which further damaged the image of muslims in the Netherlands. The news showed muslim youth dancing in the street. It proved in the eyes of many people the truth of what Theo and Pim were saying about Muslim culture.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mschipperheyn (talk • contribs) 17:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aftermath and reaction of islamic youth 

message: Should say murdered, not assassinated. He was not an office holder. That is the wrong word, technically, and it also endows too much dignity on the crime.
98.202.117.5 (talk) 16:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2014 

message: There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages. 
The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion. 
Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 05:04, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template talk:Infobox person#RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion|Request for Comments]] 

message: Every year, November 2nd is a day on which we should remember and mourn the loss of a brave, great man who was assassinated simply for exposing an inconvenient truth. Every day that we fight the satanic, sadistic, soul-less, sub-human enemy (namely, the terrorists and the radical Islamists), we must remember that we are doing so not only for ourselves and our descendants, but also for people such as Theo, who are among the victims in this war.LeQui (talk) 14:02, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  God Bless Theo's soul 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Theo van Gogh (film director). 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/20131105102756/http://www.om.nl/organisatie/item_144364/item_144365/nieuwsberichten/@128509/stand_van_zaken/ to http://www.om.nl/organisatie/item_144364/item_144365/nieuwsberichten/@128509/stand_van_zaken/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.flameout.org/flameout/vangogh/freespeech.html
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) 20:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Theo van Gogh (film director). 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://stadsarchief.amsterdam.nl/english/amsterdam_treasures/death/theo_van_gogh/index.en.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060101124421/http://www.elsevier.nl/nieuws/nederland/nieuwsbericht/asp/artnr/56876/index.html to http://www.elsevier.nl/nieuws/nederland/nieuwsbericht/asp/artnr/56876/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160116194944/http://www.theovangogh.nl/ to http://www.theovangogh.nl/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160116194944/http://www.theovangogh.nl/ to http://www.theovangogh.nl/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070605110344/http://fra.europa.eu/fra/material/pub/muslim/Manifestations_EN.pdf to http://fra.europa.eu/fra/material/pub/muslim/Manifestations_EN.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160116194944/http://www.theovangogh.nl/ to http://www.theovangogh.nl/
*Added  tag to http://www.theovangogh.nl/Hirsi_Subm.html
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) 08:50, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why is the section entitled Death, instead of Murder/Assassination? 163.1.18.120 (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death