Talk:2005 French riots/Archive 4

message: thank you wikipedians for putting so much effort into details and accuracy in this story. Kingturtle 20:37, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This looks a lot better than it did Sunday!!!  Kudos to the people who helped to design a much cleaner article!--Dr.Worm 13:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  thank you 

message: Bouna Traore and Zyed Benna as redirects? I think not. --Wonderfool t(c) 22:15, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: there is nothing notable about them except that they triggered these riots. All information on their articles is already treated here, with more detail and context. Until we get notable biographic details, or until their poems are posthumously published or something, keep the redirects. dab (ᛏ) 11:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "martyrs"? 

message: There's a group effort to censor the truth and delete an accurate page. See 2005 Belgian urban violence and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2005 Belgian urban violence. freestylefrappe 03:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Censorship 

message: 21% of France´s military is Muslim.
This is too early for the islamo-nazis and for the illuminati. That´s why the first try to calm down the rioters and the second keep as silent as possible.
The reason why the islamo-nazis are desperately trying to stop the riots is the projection of that number for 2015.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=who+are+the+illuminati+exposed+MattMarriott
:Comic fiction is fun, isn't it? 172 | Talk 04:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone stop taking their meds? --Brentt 05:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nixon Kennedy Carlyle Group Philadelphia Experiment Einstein Oppenheimer Chiang Kai-Shek Atom Bomb Johnson Knew Oswald Shot First Heritage Foundation Michael Moore Conspiracy 2004 Lincoln assassinated by time-travelling Jerry Falwell..... Kade 06:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: News at 11. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You will all KNEEL before ZOD!!! 68.95.130.81 17:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well damn, I forgot my tinfoil cap today too. Kyaa the Catlord 09:24, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Revelations says that the Wikipedia 2005 Civil Unrest article will be deleted when oil passes $66.6 per barrell? Well if its in Revelations it must be true, can't think of a more reliable source than a ancient cult's eschatology. --Brentt 01:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The script was written by the illuminati and implemented by the Moslem Leaders 

message: Where's Charles de Gaulle when one needs him? He would have cut this Gordian knot radically by repeating Algeria — getting the French to evacuate France and leave it to the Beurs and Caliph Osama. 
It is time that the French acknowledge that the Apostasy of the 1790s has got them into bad trouble and will get them into worse — National suicide. 
Undo the Freemasonic Revolution, return to orthodox Catholicism (not the "French Revolution in the Church", aka "Vatican II") with Catholic exclusivism and expell non-Catholics. 
WikiSceptic 05:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the Napoleon hat the international symbol for insanity? Kade 06:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: So why don't you post here a picture of you wearing one? WikiSceptic 07:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  What. Kade 08:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  What is it with the crazies and this thread? 211.30.200.236 10:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "What" is what you may well ask. Wikipedia is full of crazies, dominating, as I find, and when they find a few who are not, they think that they are! WikiSceptic 11:08, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's De Gaulle? 

message: What the heck is the matter with the external links section? We have a whole bunch of links about rapes (one about the gang rapes that happened in Western Sydney, Australia which is in my neck of the woods) - none of them seemingly has anything to do with the article at hand. Someone care to explain why they are in there? - Ta bu shi da yu 07:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have sent User:Malber asking him to explain his edit. - Ta bu shi da yu 07:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

text: These links are certainly relevant to discussing the problems of muslims in france but they are not relavent to this article untill the rioter's start engaging in gang rapes. Klonimus 07:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the problems of Muslims in France go to Islam in France. use , people (I call it Wikipedia:Main article fixation): this article is about the riots. Islam in France has received some 20 edits since the riots started. This is significantly less than the number of edits to this article dealing with the topic of Islam in France in general. Try to add your material to the most relevant article, not to the one you think is best visible. Edits like Malber's (if worth preserving) could be exported to a 'gender' section on "Islam in France"  dab (ᛏ) 07:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Timeline of the 2005 French civil unrest was created some time ago, but the timeline was never fully hived off. I've done so now. It might be worthwhile to retain a paragraph summary of each week.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 09:48, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I see; my revert was maybe a bit harsh, sorry. However, I maintain that this article is about the timeline of events, not an editorial about French minorities. If you want to cut the article size, cut down the "Historical perspectives" section first. Most of it is offtopic, and could be exported to Islam in France. Once this section is reduced to a short paragraph and you still want to shorten the article, we can talk about exporting accounts of the actual events this article is supposed to describe. I agree that this article could be refactored once things calm down a bit. At the moment, it is still treating an ongoing event, and the timeline is the very focus of that. dab (ᛏ) 09:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

text: what do you mean "timeline"? It isn't just a list, it is a chronological description of events, which is precisely what this article should be. I agree that the full text could be exported, but then we'd need something better to replace it, such as a good overview of the events of the first week, for example. I repeat that the pruning should first be done on material that is only tangential to the topic. As for "you haven't [objected to the move on talk]", I have. It just got archived however, see Talk:2005_French_civil_unrest/Archive_3#Proposal:_Move_Timeline_to_separate_article now. Things get buried fairly quickly here. dab (ᛏ) 10:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I didn't notice your objection (even though I did the last archive). In any case, I couldn't have associated the comment with you, as you had been logged out :). With regards to It isn't just a list, I actually believe it is: It's a series of dot pointed facts in succession - a list. It is not written; ie, in paragraphs. But I do agree that we should have something *better* to replace it. A few paragraphs on each week should be sufficient.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 10:48, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Timeline

message: proposed addition:
Recent legislation has also been passed for new laws on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools which the prime minister of turkey has pointed to as being a possible part of the motivation for the riots.
with a link to this article: French_law_on_secularity_and_conspicuous_religious_symbols_in_schools
why?
* schools have been burned down. 
* a large percentage of rioters are considered to be of muslim background which these laws effect
* - The Turkish prime minister named the French  prohibition of headscarves in schools  to be one of the reasons for the upsurge of violence in the banlieues. He stated this in an interview with the Turkish newspaper Milliyet.
quoted in this article.
:This is iron when you consider that Turkish politicians cannot wear the headscarf either!!!
* history from a million years ago is in this article
* its so god dam relvant and at least i managed to get the link into the prime minister quote.
* I had suggested this article before he even was quoted.
* i see the 3 deletions of this add on in the main article as a attempted by some people to try remove reason from the riots.
* I feel this article deserves a whole section but in this current climate of editing aggainst possible POV from rioters and over whelming support for the POV of the government. It seems impossible for balance. 
come on people. Is their anyone who agrees that this should be in the article?
--Whywhywhy 10:17, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, link to the law got added and removed dozens of times. It should be linked from the "Racial and religious tensions" subsection imho. The whole "background" thing reads like an editorial and should be cut down to a few relevant links, including this one (link to the law, don't discuss the law here). dab (ᛏ) 10:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  This law seems to have absolutely nothing to do with the present unrest. I know that there is an intense and misinformed fascination for this law in English-speaking countries, but this does not warrant inclusion on this article. I have seen absolutely no mention of this law by protesters. That it was mentioned by the Turkish Prime Minister is notable of course, but this should go to "international reactions", along with the delirium by Jirinovski about the CIA. Rama 11:59, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, the law is just illustrating cultural background, which is being done in another article now anyway; Zhirinovsky is a madman, of course; maybe we should restrict ourselves to official government statements? dab (ᛏ) 12:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well Jirinowsky is an official. Now, he's not the first one who manages to cumulate being official and mental... Rama 00:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  new laws on secularity  

message: I have to come again to this subject since the edit I've made mentionning the LA riots has been erased, several times, and without discussion here.
It is possible the people are supposed to follow the link on riots. But if so, they are directed to all kind of riots, not to specifically anti police riots. 
Moreover the tone of the article is highly dramatic and one would think reading it that what's happening has a fantastic size, when in comparison to other riots elsewhere, those ones have so far produced little damage. Is it a policy to systematically dramatize present events ? Just as in the katrina case ? Or can we from the start produce a balance account that put things into perspective ? 
THe sentence
It is the most dramatic civil disorder experienced in France since the events of May 1968 [2].
is wrong. 
Either 1968 is not a civil disorder because it was mostly a general strike, well organised, or it is. ANd in this case, 1986 and 1995 strikes apply as examples of massive desorders way over the present situation. 
What's more, the present unrest has less to do with 1968 France (student and workers movement for more liberties) and more to LOs angeles riots (anger at police violence). THe young people in the "cités" indeed often compare themselves to the US rappers, adopt their style, listen to the same kind of anti cop music etc. 
So I think reference to the LA riots must be reinstated. It also helps to put the event in perspective. The civil unrest in France has so far resulted in far less deaths and damage that the LA riots, let alone the 1968 upheaval (with all the country paralysed by a general strike, millions marching, oil lacking, panic ...)
Besides I wonder if the word "factory" is to be used. Factory seem to imply machine tools, labor division etc. ALl that has been found is a workshop where those young people around Paris build these gasoline bombs, I don't think factory applies. 
Seen from France the presentation here seems a bit exagerated. So far the events in France have led to far less damage than 6 days and nights of rioting in Los Angeles. 
Besides, for the majority of the people they are less disturbing than many strikes : most of the damage is done to those living in the "ghettos" (cités) by a minority of those living in the "ghettos". 
So it's hard to compare it to 1968 with days of general strike in France. I don't think it even compare's to 1995's strikes, or 1986. 
If there is some comparison with 1968 it is not about the amount of damage or the amount disturbance but about the lack of clear leadership and the fact that it's a youth movement. 
But durign 1968 revendications were plenty. TOo many if anything. less authority, equality of sexes, less consumerism
RIgh now rioters have no public revendication, their movement is interpreted as they have no representants, no slogans, no tracts ... 
Revendications are close to 0, the main idea being revenge against the police, protest against lack of justice and the idea that burning cars and buildings is a good way to attract the media, political attention and fundings. So far it has been working. 
It is highly probable that the riots will result in a call for more authority, schools with more male teachers, stricter sanctions teenagers under 18 and their parents. The riots would then appear as an anti 1968. 
Clearly most of those who compare the events to 1968 do so most often in order to discredit the 1968 movement, blame 1968 for producing parents lacking authority, for having destroyed the work ethic,  they belive 1968 made 2005 possible.  
I should add that mentionning the LA riots puts the riot in a wider perspective. It reduces the US Conservative focus on "Islam is taking power worldwide, especially in the no balls french monkeys", and helps understand that discriminated minorities worldwide, within which a decent  minority is making a living out of illegal activities, are always targeted by the police, and resent it. It's called statistical discrimination, if blacks as a whole commit twice more illegal activities all blacks will be checked by the police twice as much  (sometimes more) even though only a minority are responsible of these illegal activities.
And it also help to see than gun laws have helped to keep the number of deaths within controls, compare to the LA situation... 
Some comparison with the LA riots in the press
Compared to the gunbattles and body counts of riots in Los Angeles and other U.S. cities in recent decades, the French disturbances have been marked by a kind of ritualistic restraint. The rioters have mainly attacked private property and symbols of the state.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/07/MNG5KFK79T1.DTL
You should read this
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/6/2207/72726
-panache
The riots are ALL about being gettoed and ignored by the nongetto living French. Now you write most the french want to ignore the riots because it's only happening in the gettos!!! That kinda makes their point for them doesn't it? So what do they have to do to get the average french person to give a good damn? WAS 4.250 10:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually agree with this view, but I am saying, I do not think it will work. People will not care more about them because they inflicted wounds on themselves, they will just be more marginalized and shunned as a menace than before. It gives them a sense of power to make the headlines for a few days, but they will be worse off than ever in the end. dab (ᛏ) 17:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exageration : reference to 1968 and to the LA riots

message: * i ask if the fire fighters are considered diffrent then these two groups are.
and in In light of the removel of the history which i support. (It gives a chance for a more enlightened and less Fox news based article.)but Maybe it deserves a little blurb.
*Also i propose the removal of the majority of french and world political commentary to a article entitled "Political implications of civil unrest in france".
*and maybe the three can be under a sub section " Authorities Response " 
--Whywhywhy 10:53, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This has historical reasons. You may note that the article is under frenetic development. I have separated "politics" from "police" now. phew, with all the exports, I think the article is actually taking better shape now. People who want to vent about us having no clue about the banlieue can do so on Social situation in the French suburbs now :) dab (ᛏ) 11:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Majority of Political Responses removal to own article 

message: :saw a minor mistake, said started thursday 5:20 october 29, October 29 is a saturday. I assumed it meant THURSDAY OCT 27 5:20am therefore changed it
::Thanks. It seems that the article is drawing a fair share of number vandals. --Kizor 17:37, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  edit 

message: whywhywhy, you are not to 'remove outdated information' . What will you do? Delete the entire article once the riots have died down? What you need to do is date things, so the sequence of event becomes clear to people reading this a month or a year from now. dab (ᛏ) 12:55, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we've gone a little fork crazy. We now have at least three daughter articles. That's nearing 7 July 2005 London bombings! I'm not sure all are necessary. --Cyberjunkie | Talk 13:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: it's a relief, seeing that it was almost impossible to edit the article this (CET) morning. once things calm down a little bit, we can still make judgements about how to refactor the material, and what should be in the main article. We don't know how much longer this will continue. If the riots turn out to last for two months, it will clearly be inappropriate to keep detailed documentation of every single day in the main article. If all is over on Wednesday, we pretty much have all material together. We just don't know yet. dab (ᛏ) 13:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

text:  it is because this incident has taken place over a longer period . Effected phyiscal millions more people althought theirs has been only one death. Naturally alot of information will be involved and it takes alot of space and thus more articles are necessary to keep this article readable.and word to what dab said
--Whywhywhy 13:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removals/Forks

message: The following sentence should be removed from the Trigger/Catalyst section:
The New York Times reports, citing two police investigations, that the incident began at 5:20 p.m. on Thursday, 27 October 2005 in Clichy-sous-Bois when police were called to a construction site there to investigate a possible break in. 
The French police have denied this, and confirmed that they were doing an identity check, as is written twice elsewhere on the article. Ze miguel 13:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small deletion 

message: OK most of the information can be moved to the new article Social situation in the French suburbs. 
However, there are some specific topics which are not related to the general social situation but to the present situation. They should thus be in this article or in another article called, by example Political context of the 2005 civil unrest in France.
But if it is a major concerne to keep the main article readable (and thus relatively small)
# removing an information instead of moving it in a new artile is not NPOV
# beware not having something totally senseless; the choice of what is in the main article and what is in satellite articles is a POV and should be evaluated with care.
Cdang|write me 13:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the historical part 

message: The BBC have produced some nice informative maps. Maybe one of you experienced wikipedia should include this link in the article, or the maps directly in the article if it doesn't violate some kind of copy rights. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/4417096.stm  Nesnetsirk 14:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll update our maps based on this. dab (ᛏ) 14:24, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps 

message: I've been trying to look for NEUTRAL references to the riots in Arhus, Denmark, without much success. As a result, I'm becoming increasingly sceptical. Can someone give me some references that don't involve extremist anti-Islamic hate sites? XYaAsehShalomX 14:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the eagerness of the Islamophobes (not the Islamists) to portray the riots as spreading beyond France alone speaks volumes about their alleged "Islamist" nature. Fearmongery. dab (ᛏ) 14:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denmark 

message: Someone has altered the main article to refer to and link to a scatological site.  Any helpful ideas to fix it?
Miscegennation 14:29, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been reverted. Incidentally, I am answering these sorts of behaviour by immediate blocks without warning. These IPs know what they are doing, they do it repeatedly, and this article had a very high visibility. Rama 15:11, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  == Porn Link Change to Article as of 11/8/05 == 

message: 65.35.197.181 has defaced the page, it needs to be reverted.  From 65.35.197.181's user history, he might need to be banned or something.  Thanks.--Limetom 15:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs Revert 

message: can  everybody try to keep the "context" section from blowing out of proportion again? Only concise data pertaining to the actual riots are desireable, and we don't want a florilegium of newspaper editorial quotes. We may need a separate section about observations of the ethnic composition of the rioters themselves, or statements they may have made when interviewed, to parallel the "political response". dab (ᛏ) 15:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: context

message: There's a timeline at CBC.ca that starts with an incident on Oct.25 where bottles and stones were thrown at Minister Nicolas Sarkozy during a tour of Argenteuil (a Paris suburb?) dose this warrant inclusion in the main article or timeline?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/paris_riots/Mike McGregor (Can) 18:38, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it was mentioned somewhere in "Underlying causes" the last time I looked. --Kizor 19:11, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it wasn't, but there was a mention of the Argenteuil tour, so I added this there. --Kizor 19:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: October 25 incident.

message: CBC reports 5 cars burned in Belgium and 'a handful' of cars burned in Germany, (in Berlin and Bremen)
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/11/08/france-curfews051108.html
Mike McGregor (Can) 18:38, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: beyond France

message: 24 hours ago we had a great article, a focused one-stop shop article where one could find all the information related to the French riots. Now the information is dispersed over numerous sub-articles making it harder to follow and understand and political correctness has overtaken the editing of the information and has been used to censor most of the relevant information greatly reducing the usefulness of the article. Since one can just as well find the watered down narrative and talking points in any world newspaper one might ask what is the point of the Wikipedia version? --CltFn 01:08, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  You see, there is lots at stake for many people here. We are seeing the practical effects of multicultural ideology here. Those promoting it are loosing their credibility with everyone that can think, since the flaws of their policies become all to obvious to every one.
well unfortunately we dont have a team of reasonable reporters. Their is a small group and the rest just try fill it with POV. To put this into perspective it is neccary for the affending section to have their own page.
and if you cant following linked artiles in wiki i think you should consider sticking to the mainstream hard copy media which has no interactivity.Wikipedia is not a blog it is for stating the facts that you wouldnt find if you read 5 newspapers and adding all the commentary.
Where else can you find a event based page that contains all the information in one page. Its the best overview you will ever get.
--Whywhywhy 01:21, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I agree... Now the editing of the timeline has gone down to zero. Splitting the pages was perhaps a big mistake. Tfine80 02:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We are not a news source. That is the job of Wikinews. Try it: I think you'll find it a better source. We'll work at this article till it gets better. Articles are often atrocious while an event is occuring. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: In the past 24 hours this article has gone downhill

message: i think we have reached a turning point and now would be a good time to archive.alot of what is discussed above is now in diffrent articles... of course keep the still relevant stuff--Whywhywhy 02:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  time to archive discussion again