Talk:Eva Decroix

Dispute over politician's surname

@Darwinek: Hi, I noticed that you deleted the paragraph about the dispute over the Decroix surname on the Czech Wikipedia between journalists and Wikipedians. When deleting it, he argued that Deník.to is not reliable. Why do you think that? I put the paragraph back. It occurs to me that he may have heard that they received an award from a controversial Czech company for their work. Do you have any information that the awarder may have interfered with the functioning of the media? The appraiser was described as a controversial representative of the Ministry of the Interior. How will the community react if such a medium reveals fundamental findings about the incompetence of a politician who describes him in this way in the coalition? Segoulas (talk) 07:28, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Segoulas please read the big red box at the top of the edit window when you edit this article, as well as other BLPs (such as Markéta Pekarová Adamová), which says, among other things, "do not add content sourced only to tabloid journalism". The relevant policy is WP:BLPRS. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:48, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Filelakeshoe: Hello, I read both your edit summary and this comment, even though you are not the original author of the deletation. In what way does he consider the aforementioned medium to be tabloid according to Wikipedia's rules? Where can I find information about the conference with the Ugandan politician after your edits? Do you also perceive Seznam Zprávy as tabloid journalism when you delete it from your references? In what way does he see your edits as affecting the NPOV of this article?--Segoulas (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

PS: I noticed that you deleted the same paragraph about the Ugandan politician from the article Markéta Pekarová Adamová. Why did you do that when other reputable media outlets in Czechia also covered the scandal surrounding the rights of sexual minorities in the country? In what way does your behavior not meet the criteria for biased deletion of criticism?--Segoulas (talk) 20:42, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

If you disagree with mine and Darwinek's categorisation of "denik.to" as an unreliable/tabloid source, feel free to solicit some more opinions on WP:RSN, but I think it will be self-evident even to people who don't read Czech that that is a tabloid source. I removed the paragraph about the conference with the Ugandan politician (from this article, not from MPA's, absolutely no idea what you're talking about there) because it was unreferenced! There was only a citation to the official website, which only verifies that the conference happened. All material in BLPs, especially contentious material like that, has to be cited properly, and the WP:BURDEN to provide sources is on the person adding the content. If you can source that properly, you can readd it. I am not engaging in any "biased deletion of criticism", just making sure BLPs are sourced properly. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:17, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@Filelakeshoe: That's okay, I added it back in. You are a really interesting person. I am intrigued. I was intrigued by your edits of Czech politicians using WikiBlame and other tools. I can promise you that I will monitor them in the long term, neboj.--Segoulas (talk) 06:04, 22 October 2025 (UTC)