Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:35, 6 August 2007

Biography: Politics and Government Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the politics and government work group.

Central America Start‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Central America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Central America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Central AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Central AmericaCentral America Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Pro-Castro? Sandinism is not Castrism

"(pro-Castro)" association referred to Daniel Ortega is not necessary, nor very encyclopedic. It's a personal and simplicist association. This politician's ideologic and politic positions and evolution are some wider, than just "supporting Castro", besides, these kinds of conclussions are up to reader, not to author. He is Sandinist, not Castrist. Thus, I will remove "such statement", if nobody has a reasonable reason against. DeepQuasar 17:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Aleman 1980 Arrest by the Sandinistas

The statement that Aleman was arrested "on trumped-up charges" I think is innaporpriate here. What were the trumped up charges? The soveriegn Sandinista Government felt they were valid.--Agrofe 14:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The reference to the "sovereign Sandinista Government" here by user Agrofe is inaccurate. To be more precise, the allegations were from the Bolanos government, which is labeled "Conservative". Spartanad 20:04, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Transparency International List

To place him on the list, Transparency International references data on Alemán gleaned from the charges brought against him by the government of Enrique Bolaños. The country of Nicaragua is governed by a system of Napoleanic Law. This means that individuals accused of a crime are considered guilty until proven innocent. In order to refute the claims against him (and referenced by Transparency International), the burden of proving his innocence falls to Alemán.

Corrected: Berlin (Alt Moabit) was, the last time I checked, still German and not yet British. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

"Napoleonic Law", probably he means Napoleonic Code, is a law tradition in continental europe. From the wikipedia article, Louisiana also uses it. However:

This means that individuals accused of a crime are considered guilty until proven innocent.

is Bullshit. I don't know who introduced this sentence or why, but rest assured that even in France you are innocent until proven guilty. I don't even need an "citation needed"-button to dismiss this.

Obviously the (profane) individual above has never been to Nicaragua or is ignorant of la ley Nicaraguense. Whatever you wished to call it, in Nicaragua an individual is guilty until proven innocent! Reference the case of Eric Volz as one of the many proofs of this or just go look at the Constitution. Spartanad 17:12, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Transparency international may reference data from a process against him, but the claim they took unverified data seems to me very dubious in light of the wrong edits listed here so far. --85.181.26.166 02:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Stubbing

Would the editors to this article spend some time reading WP:BLP, WP:ATT and WP:NPOV. The upshot is that negative information (of which this article had quite a bit) on living people added to Misplaced Pages must be properly sourced. This article failed that condition miserably, hence the stubbing. Please resolve the current conflict and, upon the protection's expiry in a week, build the page up again in accordance with the above linked policies. – Steel 23:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Bias

There is subjectivity in this article. Saying "extensive" economic recovery is subjective. Also, he was not charged with "alleged" corruption. He was charged with corruption. Thus, there IS an allegation that he was corrupt. Finally, his ranking amongst the most corrupt officials is sourced, so removing with text that lacks a source is not good editing. Brusegadi 20:56, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The only bias I've seen so far seems to belong to Brusegadi and Notmyrealname. Almost all of your edits and revisions seem hell-bent on smearing Mr. Alemán, as well as his family. Please keep your information factual, not inflammatory.Idpounder 19:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see Civility, No personal attacks, and Assume good faith. All of my edits have been properly sourced. Please discuss any particular edits you feel do not conform to Misplaced Pages policy rather than making blanket accusations. Notmyrealname 19:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Also see WP:SOCK. Sorry, I know I have to assume good faith, but just in case. I dont want the user to lose both accounts if she is doing that, thus, a friendly warning is good.Brusegadi 19:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I can hardly find any evidence of incivility or personal attacks, unless you consider my stating what appear to be obvious conclusions based on the post history here to be such. Your 'concern' is duly noted, Brusegadi, but I am quite my own person, thank you. Or is it simply that after what appears to be many months of unrelenting attacks upon the reputation of Mr. Alemán and his family by several users here, it is suddenly uncomfortable or inappropriate to be confronted by additional users who refuse to let an apparent smear campaign pass unchallenged? Idpounder 20:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I find it oddly revealing about you, Brusegadi, that when another person challenges your continues POV'ing that you accuse me of WP:SOCK. Why, it must be "Spartanad" with a dup account, right? Maybe it is you that should rethink their position? Spartanad 20:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

If Idpounder, Spartanad, and Kageki are not sockpuppets, then why are they all making identical edits, including these: ? Notmyrealname 20:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

TI

Transparency International is based in Berlin, according to the link. Brusegadi 15:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Revisions

Please discuss changes in talk page. Also, I do not know what inflammatory adjectives you are referring to. Brusegadi 19:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Notice that I am not the only one reverting your changes; thus, that should make you wonder if you are pushing POV. Brusegadi 19:59, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that you included several more sources, all of which are the same. That is, they relate to the established fact that Aleman was convicted on several charges in 2002. However, you continue to ignore my requests related to sources to support the sentence, "Alemán and other members of his family were formally charged with corruption in December 2002, and on 7 December 2003 he was sentenced to a 20-year prison term for a string of crimes including money laundering, embezzlement and corruption." You have not produced any source material to support what is now your assault on the Aleman family. That is why I am being kind when I ask if your motivation for this is political. If it is not, you are a libeler and are demeaning Misplaced Pages in the process. Either produce sources to back up your assertions or quit using this page to perpetuate your POV. Spartanad 17:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You have to look for a source that shows that what you are trying to introduce is indeed true. I left that statement per WP:BLP but I do not think the statement is true. Find a reliable source and back it up. Finally, discussing does not mean writing something here and then going and reverting the change completely. I have added stuff to this article and invested time in it and it foes not feel good when you come and at the push of one button revert it back to you heavily POV version. Please provide reliable sources so that other stuff can be included. Brusegadi 18:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You have it wrong. In order to say that members of Aleman's family have been indicted on any crimes, you MUST site references to support it. Your assertion is circular in that it asks me to provide evidence that something is not true when, in fact, the incident did not happen! It's like me writing, "Brusegadi is a puffy, purple toad" and then asking you to cite sources to disprove. Proving the non-existence of evidence that does not exist is a circular logical argument. Misplaced Pages is not an attack forum and you are knowing demeaning it by knowingly perpetuating harmful lies. I have changed parts of my edits to eliminate POVs. You, however, are proving to be completely intractable. Spartanad 18:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thats not what I said. I said that if you want me to find evidence that Aleman has been 'absolved' that I cannot find such evidence and that you will have to look for it. If you look on the article, I have removed mentions of his family unless supported by a source.Brusegadi 21:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I added some more sources, as you can see, one source does mention the participation of members of his family, so I left one mention of that. I also did research on the presumption of innocence in Nicaragua, and I found one source. I believe that in order to be a member of the OAS Nicaragua must guarantee such things, but I am not sure. Brusegadi 22:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The article (dated to 2002) that you reference as referring to a member of Aleman's family is POV from the original author. It says that the daughter, Maria Dolores Aleman, was part of a "scheme", as were "a brother and sister". Whatever the "scheme" was, it did not yield charges against *any* member of Aleman's family. This is a negative POV smear and was removed. I reverted the document but am amenable to leaving in the part about Aleman's minister since that is a verified fact. The source you used to change the writing that states how Nicaragua operates under Napoleonic Code relates not to the judicial system but to the rules governing *Special Tribunals*, and is WRONG. Your source is a description of how the special tribunals worked in Nicaragua during the trials of former members of the Somoza regime. Please, please, please read the material that you use as a source and understand it beforehand. Here are a few quotes, albeit out of context, from your source:

"1. Every accused person shall be entitled to the following minimum guarantees, in equality of conditions: a. That his guilt shall not be presumed until a formal sentence of imprisonment has been pronounced against him" "2. A number of legal systems admit that, under certain circumstances, the benefit of the presumption of innocence is waived, and as a result, the burden of proof reverts to the accused, if certain circumstantial evidence is present. The legal notion, “circumstantial evidence”, overrides the presumption of innocence; it inverts the burden of proof because of the overwhelming coincidence of inculpating evidence against the person accused. According to this view, whenever such circumstantial evidence exists, the accused is presumed guilty." Spartanad 23:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the Danish document stays. The citation does not say that his family was charged, it says that they were involved, which is different. Since it is quoted, you have really no reason to deleted. Of course that, you seem to believe that anything that says something bad about Aleman is POV. I also reverted back to the nonsensical Napoleonic code (really meaninig civil code) but notice in your statement above that it is not in general that the accused is considered guilty as the Aleman article makes believe. As soon as I find a better source I will rewrite that. Brusegadi 01:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Brusegadi - you are hopeless. When I read the article there are many things that do not paint Aleman in a favorable light that I do not object to. Rather, I think that you have a need to flame both the ex-president and his family. If someone argues against slander of Aleman, such as me, by your flawed logic that means I am an Arnoldista. There is no question that he has been convicted of criminal activities but not his family. As your writing and comments show, you are also very unversed in Nicaraguan law. Spartanad 02:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Stop reverting sourced info. Those edits are not constructive. Brusegadi 02:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It is funny that these revisions insist on referring to "alleged health problemss" when the article "Why the Caged Bird Sings" actually says, quote/unquote, "Clean bill of health? Not exactly. At 61, Alemán is obese and reportedly in frail health, suffering from ten different chronic illnesses." Both authors are not neutral; "sources" are questionable opinion pieces. Spartanad 16:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Please stop making these large-scale revisions of properly sourced material. Go ahead and make changes to individual passages if they are not properly sourced. You can also insert additional information if it is sourced, but not if it is just your opinion or original research. There is plenty of room for improvement on this article, but do not engage in edit warring. The Time article goes on to counter the "reportedly in good health" statement with the following: "But the hawkish Alemán, who speaks wistfully of the repressive days of the Somoza dictatorship (which Ortega overthrew as leader of the Sandinista insurgents), was never a typical prisoner. He has spent more of his jail sentence in a hospital bed recovering from a minor finger surgery (three months to be exact) than he spent behind bars. And now that full freedom appears to be just around the corner, he has valiantly cast aside concerns for his own health for the good of his party's.

"Seeing the landscape of my country is better than any aspirin or pills," Alemán said. "Seeing the clear eyes and holding the calloused hands of the hardworking farmers is what gives me health. So why do I need medicine?" (A calloused handshake is not exactly a typical treatment for diabetes, hypertension and heart problems.)" There is no justification for removing this article from the bibliography. Notmyrealname 16:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

This is a BIOGRAPHY page, yet the major portion of the content is dedicated to "CORRUPTION". Aleman is not a universally hated figure in Nicaragua or elsewhere. Every "edit" that I have seen, especially recently, is a smear. Some "edits" rely exclusively on articles such as "Why the Caged Bird Sings", which within itself has no citations to back up its POV pieces. What you are so adamantly referring to as "properly sourced material" seems to me as cherry-picked opinion pieces (except for the Transparency Intl piece that I have left untouched) that "support" your efforts to smear the individual on his own biography page. Spartanad 18:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

The Time Magazine piece is a perfectly valid reliable source. Magazines and newspapers do not generally cite sources. If the information is properly sourced and cited, it is not a "smear." See WP:BLP and you will see that including negative information, if it is sourced, is perfectly acceptable. You are more than welcome to include other, more positive information, if it is properly sourced. You may not, however, simply remove properly sourced information that you dislike. Notmyrealname 18:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Every public figure of significance has negative press written about him/her. That does not make such material a legitimate piece of their Biography. Therefore, the negative information that you have included (and I have exhaustively highlighted above) does indeed constitute a "smear" and does not belong here, nor will it be tolerated. Spartanad 18:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be unclear on Misplaced Pages policy. Public figures is very clear that "In the case of significant public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable, third-party published sources to take material from, and Misplaced Pages biographies should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is notable, relevant, and well-documented by reliable published sources, it belongs in the article — even if it's negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If it is not documented by reliable third-party sources, leave it out." Further, charges of Aleman's corruption, and his conviction on these charges, is a very important part of his notoriety. The items on this page are all properly sourced, except the part about his relatives, which should be removed, unless other sources can be provided. In your blanket revisions, you are also removing valid sources such as the Washington Post, the New York Times, and Time Magazine. This is vandalism and will be treated as such. Please confine your edits to questions of fact and sourcing. Notmyrealname 18:48, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit wars

Two editors here are involved in a classic edit war. WP:AGF means that you should operate under the assumption that everyone is trying to improve the article here. WP:RS means that you have to pick reliable sources and back up the edits you make. Reverting each others' edits back and forth does not help anything, and will likely lead to the article being protected and one or both of you blocked for violating WP:3RR. Also note that WP:BLP means that we have to be especially careful to only include information that can be properly sourced, especially if it defamatory. There is plenty written on Aleman in reliable sources so that this should not be a problem. If you need to pull other people in here, try posting a note on the WP:BLPN.

Regarding the Danish source, it doesn't look to me like a reliable source. It appears to be an NGO rather than an independent news service. If the information about Aleman's family is correct, please find another source to back it up.

Regarding the statement that Aleman was absolved of all but one of the charges against him, I removed this, as it was unsourced and I couldn't find anything to back it up. In fact, the Time Magazine article indicates that he is currently serving a twenty year sentence, although it is has been reduced due to political machinations. Further, there is no cause to remove the Time Magazine article from the bibliography. Notmyrealname 04:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

There was previously an unsourced statement about Aleman being in his 'private ranch.' I changed it to house because it sounds less extravagant and it is a better term per BLP and NPOV. But, I found this. I think the source is reliable and it contains much information. What do you think? I am only asking because I will attempt to refrain from major changes until tomorrow. I will do this, but please do not revert back to the previous Aleman POV version. I will also look into the Danish source replacement. Brusegadi 05:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Finally, here is another source that can substitute or back up the Danish source. Please see under August 2002. Brusegadi 05:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Both these sources seem to qualify as reliable sources. I still don't see other mentions of charges against Aleman's family, although the Washington Post article mentions that his wife also made charges on the credit cards. There is definitely more useful info in these two articles that should be included here. As for the second source, since it is not a newspaper or magazine, we should be careful to identify it in the text (perhaps as something like, "Global Integrity, Washington-based non-profit anti-corruption organization, reports that ..." Notmyrealname 17:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Although you two (Brusegadi, Notmyrealname) are complaining about my edits and reverts, my opinion is as valid as yours. IMO, you are using this biography page as an attack medium against Aleman. As mentioned in the "Revisions" section, the main category that you have created in the page is called "CORRUPTION"! The purpose of a biography page is to give a neutral look at the life of somebody. I have left alone the source material about the Transparency International rankings. However, you two are bringing in other members of Aleman's family in order to smear them when they have had no charges pressed against them. It would be exactly similar to calling Nixon's wife a crook! One of those you reference is Aleman's sister Amelia, who died of cancer in 2002. Why does she belong in this article at all?? As long as the smear campaign continues there can be no end to my revisions/reverts of the material. I am trying to protect the integrity of Misplaced Pages. Spartanad 18:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Aleman is a living person so we must not smear him. In this case it is particularly important as according to his suporters his opponents are indeed smearing him. We musnt smear him or take sides. having said that edit warring never achieved anything and it is much better to discuss each point here. You dont protect teh integrity of wikipedia by edit warring is generally considered to be true but we must protect the integrity of Aleman as well, SqueakBox 18:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

When I started editing this article there was some serious bias against him. What I did was to remove charged statements (eg. he is in house arrest because of 'health' problems) and much unsourced stuff. Then I proceeded to add sources to the accusations. I have not removed unsourced positive stuff per BLP. Spartanad accusses me of POV pushing, I dont think I am. I have sourced everything, including the accusations on his family members. Is it important to mention his family? Well, the sources thought it was important! I recall that we tend to establish notability via reliable sources. I am sure that if Mrs. Nixon had had anything to do with Watergate she would have an entire section in wikipedia devoted to it. Finally, Spartanad simply tends to simply revert everything, including improvements on grammar. I think that is why we eneded up in an edit war. It is really hard to be constructive when someone says 'i dont like the last sentence' and then reverts the entire article. Finally, please read the articles I have referenced and decide for your self how biased the article is. Brusegadi 18:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I have tidied things u

Your 'tidying up' seemed to amount to little more than re-introducing the smear campaign elements, with slightly changed wording and grammar. You seem to overlook the fact that the entire case around Mr. Alemán was built on charges leveled by Bolanos, and that these charges have since been almost entirely refuted. They are the basis, sadly, for much of the world's perceptions, however.Idpounder 19:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Corruption heading

The heading "Corruption" was recently changed to "Corruption charges." Given the fact that he was convicted and not merely charged, I think this should at the least be altered to "Corruption charges and conviction" or "Corruption charges, trial, and conviction". Notmyrealname 18:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I think its too long for a section title but I dont strongly object to "Corruption charges and conviction", SqueakBox 18:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I would have no problem with that. I do think simply putting "corruption charges" gives the false impression that the case only proceeded to the stage of accusation. Notmyrealname 19:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Done, SqueakBox 19:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

As long as everything is clear in the section it self, it should be fine. Brusegadi 19:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the section lacks ref'd material from his supporters and hope Spartanad will add something along those lines, Aleman doesnt lack for supporters, SqueakBox 19:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Page protected

The page is now protected as a result of recent edit warring. Things have degenerated to a point where it appears likely that sockpuppetry is being used to evade the three-revert rule. The protection can be lifted earlier if consensus is reached here, or if other administrative actions render the protection unnecessary. Raymond Arritt 20:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

• Start-Class biography articles
• Start-Class biography (politics and government) articles
• Unknown-importance biography (politics and government) articles
• Politics and government work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• Start-Class Central America articles
• Latin America articles