Talk:Gérard Royal

message: *Really ? Is there a prosecution under way somewhere ? an indictment ? do you have any reference ? Hektor 13:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As the article explains, his brother has claimed he admitted to planting the bombs in the Sinking of the Rainbow Warrior. This claim is made in a reliable source which we mention. This is widely considered a terrorist attack in New Zealand, and was apparently even labelled as such by France. As such, accused terrorist bomber is probably a fair label Nil Einne 19:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous.Hektor 19:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree. When I visited the article, the info on him allegedly being involved in the Rainbow Warrior bombing was sourced with a link to the Herald article so I'm a bit confused as to what Hektor was complaining about. The fact that the Rainbow Warrior bombing is considered a terrorist attack by many is noted in the respective article, as I mentioned and even the French government said it was a terrorist attack, so I personally don't really think there is any doubt that someone who is accused of being involved in it, is an accused terrorist. However I feel the current wording is more informative so don't see a need to change it back. Personally, I'm opposed to the excess labelling of people as terrorists however this IMHO is clear cut case Nil Einne 11:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think there are defamatory elements in this article (the category "terrorists" for instance) and that wikipedia could be successfully sued for libel based on this. Maybe you don't care, but I do. Please refer to the policy regarding the biographies of living persons. Hektor 12:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hektor, you mention the catergory terrorist, but imply other parts of the article may open Wikipedia to legal liability - except possibility the description of him as one of a the team of saboteurs, I can not see what else would lead to a successful action in my jurisdiction (and, incidentally, I have a law degree).  Could you please advise what other parts of the article you consider defamatory, and why you consider those parts of the article would not stand up in court?   Regarding the Catergory "Terrorists", I didn't add that catergory, which I think might seem a bit emotive.  On the other hand I do not see how you could criticise it for accuracy, nor could Royale mount a successful legal action against it - for, given that truth is an absolute defence to defamation, a defence would only need to prove - on the low test of balance of probabilities - a reasonable belief that Royale had been involved in the terrorist attack on the Raonbow Warrior.  Royale's involvement in the plot to blow up the Rainbow Warrior is accepted by the French Government and he has been named by his own brother as having being in the team  - he has spoken to the media since and has certainly not denied his participation.  Winstonwolfe 02:00, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Note also if there are any who still doubt that this is widely considered a terrorist attack, see Sinking of the Rainbow Warrior which states that even the French government called it a terrorist attack before they admitted their involvement. (actually I see I already noted this above) Note also when I made the above comment he was in the accused terrorists cat not the terrorists cat (which was changed here ). The cat has now been removed and I'm not going to bother re-adding it.  Also, I'm one of the strongest defenders of BLP but in this instances, it's seems blindly obvious to me that the accused terrorist cat is acceptable Nil Einne 11:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "accused terrorist bomber"

message: I suggest also to merge with the article of his sister since he is not notable except in the light of his sister's candidacy. Hektor 10:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Gérard Royal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061124015911/http://www.lexpress.fr/info/france/dossier/presidentielle/dossier.asp?ida=437372 to http://www.lexpress.fr/info/france/dossier/presidentielle/dossier.asp?ida=437372
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified