Jump to content

Talk:Greta Thunberg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 86.187.165.195 (talk) at 14:09, 24 May 2020 (→Naomi Seibt). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by EggOfReason, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 15 December 2018.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 19 January 2020.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles


Allegations regarding Keean Bexte

I'd like to discuss the possibility of verifying two Swedish sources stating that the private security firm of Greta Thunberg assaulted a Canadian reporter named Keean Bexte from Rebel News.

"Swedish papers Samhällsnytt and Nya Dagbladet published an article stating that the Canadian reporter Keean Bexte had been assaulted by Greta Thunbergs private security guards as he approached her to ask some questions about her school strike in Stockholm. After the assault, the guard allegedly said "You are dangerous to us".[1][2]"

Samhällsnytt and Nya Dagbladet are both two online newspapers protected by Swedish constitutional law. Two articles mention that a Canadian reporter was assaulted, and due to Greta Thunbergs media popularity, mainstream media has avoided mentioning this. A documentary called "Greta Inc" includes the scene where a security guard pushes the reporter.[3] Its also mentioned in Politikfakta.[4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fa alk (talk • contribs)

References

  1. ^ Aksoy, Mira (26 January 2020). "Greta Thunbergs egna vakter knuffade iväg journalist: "Du är farlig för oss"". Samhällsnytt (in Swedish).
  2. ^ "Gretas privata säkerhetsvakter knuffade iväg granskande journalist". Nya Dagbladet (in Swedish). No. Greta's private security guards pushed the investigative journalist away. 24 January 2020.
  3. ^ LLC, Rebel News Network Productions. "Greta Thunberg Incorporated: The Exposé". Rebel News.
  4. ^ "Journalist attackerad av Klimatångest-Gretas livvakter – public service tiger". Politikfakta (in Swedish). 27 January 2020.

--Fa alk (talk) 14:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of those sources are reliable - they're extremist fringe publications, as noted above. Whether or not they are "constitutionally protected" has nothing to do with whether Wikipedia views them as reliable.
Keean Bexte formerly worked for a white supremacist website which sold merchandise promoting racial hatred, and should not be viewed as credible. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 15:05, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
None of this has anything to do with the subject of this article. HiLo48 (talk) 23:07, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's pretty much a good point. This seems tangential to Thunberg. Bus stop (talk) 00:41, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The assaults by Thunberg's private security firm are on film. More credible than that is not possible. 86.187.165.195 (talk) 14:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naomi Seibt

There was an article in Sunday's Washington Post about the "anti-Greta", Naomi Seibt.[1]

The English language article on her is just a stub. I'm thinking it would be a good idea to expand the article, and, maybe, link to it from the criticism section of the Greta article, to make people aware of what the climate-deniers are trying to do.

Then again, if she's not getting much attention, maybe we shouldn't draw attention to her...?

The German-language article has much more information, so we could translate what they have: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Seibt If somebody reading this is fluent in German, perhaps you could do this. If not, I will try. Paulmlieberman (talk) 19:30, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore it. This is the article about Thunberg, not her enemies. HiLo48 (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "The anti-Greta: A conservative think tank takes on the global phenomenon". Washington Post. 23 Feb 2020.
The article is about Thunberg's enemies as well as friends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipuffery 86.187.165.195 (talk) 14:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Her father and the infobox

Svante is not independently notable and does not have his own article (redirects to his wife/Greta's mother.) We do not put non-notable people in {{Infobox person}}. It is just not done. When someone has children we put the number of children unless some are notable. Therefore, the "father" parameter in this article goes unused. Thank you! Elizium23 (talk) 23:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Her own COVID-19 speculation

I know that self-identification is the biggest WP:V loophole ever created, and we are in love with whatever notable people say about themselves to interviewers and allegedly WP:RS but do we really need to repeat Thunberg's completely unfounded speculation that she had COVID-19? She had no testing, she has no medical opinion, she has nothing but her teenage feelings telling us that maybe she possibly had it. Given that she has also allegedly recovered from it, I see no reason to include it at all in her bio. Completely WP:UNDUE stuff. Elizium23 (talk) 00:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, per WP:BLPSPS, we absolutely can't use her Instagram as a source to say her father (or anyone else) had the disease, because that's a claim about a third party. Elizium23 (talk) 00:57, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Shes a role model and warns young people to be aware they may not realize they have the virus but they could still pass it on to others more at risk. Besides she had symptoms so its not unfounded speculation. That aside, we put all her opinions about climate change up (which some people think are unfounded) so whats the difference. Pinklydo (talk) 01:05, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pinklydo, your clumsy restoration included the claim about her father, which as I said falls under WP:BLPSPS and I have helpfully WP:BLPREMOVEd it again for you. You're welcome. Elizium23 (talk) 01:11, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well done. Pinklydo (talk) 01:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Well done"? LOL 86.187.231.43 (talk) 11:55, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Early life & personal life

Thunberg is "known for her youth". No kidding, really? 86.187.174.77 (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be some difficulty deciding where Greta's statement that she thinks she had Covid-19 should go. It has moved from the Further activism in Europe section to her Early life and now to a completely new section called Personal life. Since there is already a section about her Mental health under Early life (which is very personal), it seems to me that getting Covid-19 fits under this section as well. I don't think we need a new section called Personal Life. Pinklydo (talk) 06:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is she going to diagnose herself with hypochondria as well? Elizium23 (talk) 07:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
LOL 86.187.231.43 (talk) 11:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most articles on living celebrities (see, e.g. Colin Powell) have a section near the top called "Early life" or "Early life & education", and another section close to the bottom (after all the public things they are famous for) called "Personal life". I was modeling this content move on those articles. Paulmlieberman (talk) 17:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken - except that Greta is only 17 and Colin Powell is 83. At the moment everything Greta has done has occurred in her Early life. The second point is that if we're going to have a separate section called Personal life, her mental health issues should probably be under that section. Pinklydo (talk) 18:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. "early life" implies events that help shape you as a person. COVID doesn't fit there. We could try to eliminate all mention of it, but I'd rather just stick it down at the bottom. Her mental health issues are part of how she became a person who has galvanized the climate change movement, hence "Early life". Paulmlieberman (talk) 18:26, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnuniq: has opined on WP:BLPN to the effect that a WP:BLPPRIMARY source is not sufficient for these kinds of claims. If you find secondary source(s) then it can be re-added. Currently, this is just a random thought-bubble from social media. Elizium23 (talk) 06:36, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think "Early life" is relative to when the notable person began their career or activity. Thunberg has begun her activism at an early age, and so her "early life" would only encompass events that occurred before she embarked on her "career", necessarily cutting off by 13-14 or so. I also feel "Early life" and "Personal life" in most BLPs is a very artificial dichotomy and it's not an ideal situation to have someone's birth and upbringing in the very beginning of an article, and their marriages, social life, and death in a completely different part of the article. It lends a very disjointed feel to the bio. Elizium23 (talk) 06:41, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A useful test for a situation like this is to defer adding text for, say, a month. Consider it then if reliable sources are still discussing the issue. Discussions in a month (not including whatever ranting is going on in social media) would lend weight to the idea that the claim is more than a thought bubble. Per WP:NOTNEWS, delaying is not a problem. Johnuniq (talk) 08:57, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI, I agree with both Elizium23 and Johnuniq. Paulmlieberman (talk) 13:48, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The story has developed. Greta was interviewed by the New Scientist and says just because of Covid-19, we shouldn't take our foot off the accelerator regarding climate change.Pinklydo (talk) 22:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Does this have something to do with her personal health? Elizium23 (talk) 00:18, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pinklydo, personally, I would continue suppressing the speculation that Thunberg was infected (and quit doing it to her father too) because it's immaterial to the points she raised about the pandemic in general. Her personal health is not important to the movement she is a leader of. Elizium23 (talk) 02:41, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
1) She also speculates that the world is facing an existential crisis - but nobody wants to suppress that.
2) If she didn't think she and her father had got the virus, she might not be talking about the pandemic at all. Of course its material - just as her mental health issues are material to her concern about the environment. Pinklydo (talk) 07:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Pinklydo "She also speculates that the world is facing an existential crisis" well yes, but it's a tiny bit different in that the speculation over her possible infection with Covid-19 isn't (so far as I'm aware) against a background of 98% of scientists convinced that she has. I think it's probably best to not emphasise dubious trivia until it reveals itself –in time – to be a material fact, or not. Cheers! Captainllama (talk) 03:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
1) She is not backed by 98% of scientists saying we are facing an existential crisis either. That is her own speculative take on the issue - one that many agree with, but not 98%. The 98% refers to scientists who agree that global warming is due to human beings.
2) Her perception that she had the virus is not trivia if it informs her thinking - which it clearly has. Pinklydo (talk) 03:51, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Better leave her COVID19 speculations out. Nobody knows if she had it or not; it's her own OR. It has played no significant part in developing her thinking. The New Scientist article was about the distraction from the CC debate, not about her. It is not a significant event; if it had killed her, yes, she had mild symptoms that some might construe as COVID19. Maybe 70% of us are destined to get it, are we going to tag 70% of living bios with it? Ex nihil (talk) 09:59, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Picture change

Greetings, Thatsnotmyname2020. May I ask what the problem is you have with the new infobox image that was added? It is more recent that the one you have reverted to and is very clear and well taken. I see no reason why it is in any way inferior to the photo you have reverted to. In addition, this change has been active for almost two weeks and no one else has seemingly had any problem with this change until your sole revert now. Helper201 (talk) 00:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Greta_Thunberg&oldid=958563069"