Content deleted Content added
SiberianCat (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 122:
:: Hi {{Re|OspreyPL}}, thanks for your response. The content which you claim to be irrelevant is not the subject's views on the president. It is about the subject's effort to raise his own political popularity by appealing to nostalgia for the time of his father's rule, by means of criticizing the incumbent president. This has been documented by reputable media sources and is referenced in the text. I'd be grateful if you could please explain how you feel this irrelevant (without trying to tie it to a non sequitur such as Paris Hilton's drinking habits). Thank you. [[User:SiberianCat|SiberianCat]] ([[User talk:SiberianCat|talk]]) 14:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
:::Saying that he tried to use nostalgia of good old times of his father rule to win an election would suffice. There is no need of explaining his personal views on infrastructure as he is a disgraced murdered and has not much influence. OspreyPL 15:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt and civil reply. I do appreciate it. I notice another user has deleted the mention of nostalgia, claiming it comes from a non-neutral and unreliable source (a news article by Reuters) - and that you have therefore deleted the remaining part of the sentence. There are many reliable news sources about the subject's effort to appeal to nostalgia. I disagree that I am explaining the subject's personal views on infrastructure - what I did was give an example of his effort to appeal to nostalgia by criticizing the incumbent's spending (and debt level) on infrastructure. Merely stating that "he attempted to appeal to nostalgia" without providing any evidence or an example - diminishes the credibility of the information. I disagree that a politician's status as having been convicted of murder by proxy should render information about their political platform irrelevant. I also respectfully disagree that the subject "has not much influence". It takes considerable influence to have a jail term substantially reduced. There are also much more recent legal cases that indicate influence. Anyway, I'll move this discussion to the article's talk page. Again, thanks for your civility and explaining your view. [[User:SiberianCat|SiberianCat]] ([[User talk:SiberianCat|talk]]) 16:20, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
| |||