Talk:Émile Dewoitine

message: I've tagged this article as "NPOV Disputed" because I feel that the way the paragraphs making reference to collaborationism and war criminals are redacted can make a reader be biased.
I'm particularly concerned on the statement about Argentina being "a major refuge of former Nazi members or Collaborationists". Even though it is known that several nazis sought refuge in Argentina in the immediate postwar, and most of them were even captured and trialled later, there is no factual support to assert the condition of "major".
It would be appreciated if an experienced editor can review this article and help unbias the concerned paragraphs, if I'm right in what I sustain.
Apart from that, I believe that the article should be tagged as a "stub biography", but I cannot fint the adequate tag.
Many thanks.
DPdH 03:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Épuration légale: amnesties were issued in 1947, 1951 and 1953. As the article states, he was condemned for "intelligence with the enemy and attack on state security". Tazmaniacs 14:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV: Argentina referred as a "Major" refuge of Nazis 

message: so sorry, my english is so bad..... but you have to read the book: "Emile Dewoitine" by Raymond Danel, c/o DOCAVIA/Editions Larivière
MC.GOY (mgoy@club-internet.fr)--86.217.219.198 20:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  about emile dewoitine 

message: I came to this page hoping to find more info about Emile Dewoitine than I currently have and I must say I'm surprised. The article seems to aim at showing that ED was only a war criminal. Almost no mention is made of his work as an aeronautical engineer, and what little is done in that respect is incorrect. ED was responsible for a large number of very important aircraft designs, which are not even mentioned.
Whoever wrote that article that way does not know much about aviation, nor does he understand the situation in France during the 2nd World War. Collaboration was most often enforced and is certainly not to be compared with war crimes. As written here, it is simple defamation. The quote from Stehlin should also not be used out of context. As it is presented here, one could suppose Dewoitine was trying to prevent the D.520 from becoming operational, which is completely untrue. Large numbers of brand-new D.520s were available and not used at the time of the invasion because some of their equipment (radios, guns, instruments) had not been delivered and because there was no time to train pilots on the new machines.
This article seriously needs to be re-written and is not at all worthy of Wikipedia. This is an unfortunate example of what can be wrong with the "wiki" system.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.221.155.2 (talk) 14:24, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the purpose of this article? 

message: I don't want to re-write the whole article, mostly because I don't have enough material. But I believe replacing the current article by a stub is justified. An accurate stub is better imho than a wildly biased article. What is written here is mostly political and inaccurate.
Mistakes in the current article (aka reasons to replace with a stub):
1. Quote n°2 is erroneous. The original article is political and wrong, aviation-wise. It does not actually quote Stehlin. 
2. ED did not join Aérospatiale during World War One: it didn't exist. He was already aged when the company was created in 1970. He merely was received by the head of Aérospatiale in 1971
3. The sentence "In 1940, he produced planes without a chassis in the US along with General Arnold and Henry Ford." does not mean anything. Planes never have a chassis, only cars do. In 1940, ED was producing fighter aircraft for France. General Arnold did not produce aircraft, neither did Henry Ford.
4. "Collaboration and escape to Argentina" section: we are told when ED went to Argentina, on what ship, at what time, in which class, and with whom. But we are not told details like what the SIPA is, what exactly ED was condemned for... Presumably they are not significant enough.
5. He was invited on board the Concorde once. Well. There's a healthy piece of information. I once wore a red sweater. I'll write a Wikipedia article on that, if you're interested.
6. ED was "the founder of the plants that today form part of EADS." I suppose this is supposed to make him some big corporate boss of sorts. Well, he did found a manufacturing plant, which was bought by another company, which changed name, which was incorporated in something else, etc... and eventually ended being one of the EADS plants. The only common points between ED and EADS are the letters E and D, and the fact they used a common building at different time periods.
7. Quote n°6. Who needs a quote concerning the date of his death? There is no argument about this. Or maybe its just intended to add an item to the "references" section, which would make the article look more verifiable.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.221.155.2 (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have problems with specific contents, then you discuss it. Please do not delete the article like you did. As to your claim (in precedent section) that "Collaboration was most often enforced and is certainly not to be compared with war crimes.", you might need some reading (Robert Paxton, etc.) on Vichy France, the Rafle du Vel' d'Hiv, etc. Thank you, Tazmaniacs (talk) 13:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

text: , please stop vandalism. Tazmaniacs (talk) 14:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Like Louis Renault, Emile Dewoitine was accused of pursuing his activity as an industrialist, while under the occupation. This is not comparable with sending people to the death camps, IMHO. PpPachy (talk) 20:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replacement by a stub