Talk:Gregorian Bivolaru
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
The legal history section is being narrated in ever greater detail with a blow-by-blow news-based account. This is now probably at or over the WP:UNDUE boundary. At the moment the section is a mass of small disconnected paragraphs, each echoing a small bit of news: this is not an encyclopedic style (instead, it's a list). What we ought to be doing, rather than relying on a mass of legal documents and news reports, is to give an encyclopedia-like condensed summary of the extended proceedings using reliable secondary (or tertiary) sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:14, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Chiswick Chap: Gabriel Andreescu has two comprehensive works about the legal problems of MISA. He has a strong pro-MISA slant, but he can be trusted to render the hard facts. But he did not cover the 2023-2025 events. He just signed an appeal to free two MISA members arrested in Georgia, that's his only reaction I could find after November 2023. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Usable with care... occasionally Wikipedia is rational about sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:06, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Two associates of his were extradited from Georgia to France, but I don't have a WP:RS about that. tgeorgescu (talk) 05:12, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
- Then we can't say anything about it, but it sounds at best borderline for this article anyway. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:46, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
@IP: the information you sought to delete included both defense and lambasting of Bivolaru/MISA. WP:NPOV cuts both ways.
So, not one negative article quoted is sloppy editing.
Rendering both sides of the dispute, with an emphasis on hard facts, is not propaganda.
The paramount of purpose of Wikipedia isn't lambasting (or defending) criminals, but understanding reality.
Why are we having this discussion? Because the Romanian press and the Romanian Justice made such a mess that he could convincingly claim he was persecuted. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:31, 25 May 2025 (UTC)