Talk:Pál Schmitt

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

Resignation[edit]

Does someone know, if Schmitt's resignation takes effect immediately? Gugganij (talk) 12:12, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, it doesnt, so the info in the article is wrong. --maxval (talk) 12:35, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Scmitt is no longer president since 16:28 local time - [1]. --maxval (talk) 15:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

W T F?[edit]

by a questionably legal session [...] That session ignored the legal maxims: "In case of doubt, for the accused": the accused was not even invited. He has just arrived from an official visit to South Korea. Also the important principle of "Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done" was intentionally ignored. There was no need for convening that Senate-sitting other than to rob him of the chance to acknowledge that there were errors in granting him that title. The whole thing is a politicly motivated farce. I don't know if this particular meeting was fair or not, but I know blatant POV when I see it. And then you edit protect the article. What has become of Wikipedia? --88.73.20.121 (talk) 13:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Questionably legal session'[edit]

In the introduction, it says 'he was stripped by a questionably legal session of the Senate of the SOTE.' On one hand, it has no link to SOTE, so it's kinda weird, on the other, it was perfectly legal, as it can be found in the academic misconduct article with the following link: http://index.hu/belfold/2012/04/02/schmitt_elviheti_a_showt/itt_a_nagyjabol_utolso_szog_schmitt_elnoksegenek_koporsojaba/ . 88.209.182.230 (talk) 13:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing statements[edit]

Currently the article states:

and concluded that despite the "procedural shortcomings," the dissertation did formally satisfy the practices of the time. The committee's report, issued on 27 March, blamed the Testnevelési Egyetem for not revealing the copied sources, but fell short of putting any blame on Schmitt ("the author may have thought that his dissertation satisfied the requirements").

and then goes on to mention how his title was stripped. But this is rather confusing. What does it mean he 'thought that his dissertation satisfied the requirements' if it did actually formally satisfy the practices of the time? (Whether he thought it did is surely irrelevant if it did satisfy the requirements.) And why was his title stripped if he satisfied the requirements? (And without wanting to be too WP:Soapboxy, did a dissertation primarily copied from other sources, whether or not those source were identified and properly cited, really satisfy the requirements?) Most of the sources are Hungarian so I can't check them myself. Nil Einne (talk) 06:54, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 3 April 2012[edit]

Error on Pal Schmitt page regarding his birthplace.

Source states that in 1942, Hungary was a 'People's Republic' although in actuality it was governed by Regent Miklos Horthy as the 'Kingdom of Hungary' (1920 - 1946)

2.102.68.82 (talk) 11:27, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for noticing this. I checked and you're correct Kingdom of Hungary 1920-1946 is our article covering Hungary during the time he was born so I've made the change. Nil Einne (talk) 12:25, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Puppet cartoon[edit]

I suggest the removal of the puppet cartoon from the Presidency section:

  • It illustrates a point – ie. the former President being a pawn of the Prime Minister – which seems POV to me;
  • His apparent close ties to the governing party are described in a neutral tone in the surrounding paragraphs, this cartoon provides no additional information;
  • Compared to other political figures on Wikipedia it appears to be quite rare that a political cartoon is even used in a similar article;
  • In my opinion the cartoon itself, its execution is rather poor.

—Tombartal (talk) 21:12, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the illustration for POV and possible libel in a biography of a living person —Tombartal (talk) 15:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

opening sentence[edit]

instead of:

Pál Schmitt (Schmitt Pál, Hungarian pronunciation: [ʃmit paːl]; born 13 May 1942) is a Hungarian sportsman and politician who served as President of Hungary from 2010 to 2012.

it should read

Pál Schmitt (Schmitt Pál, Hungarian pronunciation: [ʃmit paːl]; born 13 May 1942) is a Hungarian sportsman, ACADEMIC and politician who served as President of Hungary from 2010 to 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.135.162 (talk) 03:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was he an academic? Perhaps I missed it but the only academic work our article describes is the Dr. Univ. I presume he may have done some earlier postgraduate work. But if that's all it would IMO be fairly unusual to describe one of his careers as an academic in an overall article based solely on a Ph.D even if you would normally consider him an academic while doing his Ph.D. I personally would expect at least a postdoc or some academic research or lecturer work after a Ph.D for someone described as an academic. In fact our article Pál Schmitt scientific misconduct controversy suggests the Dr. Univ isn't quite equivalent to a Ph.D and isn't generally considered an academic degree. While it may seem slightly unusual for someone to get in to problems for academic misconduct if you don't consider them academics in most regards, in reality even someone doing a bachelors or similar undergraduate degree could easily get in to problems for academic misconduct yet few would consider them academics in most regards. Nil Einne (talk) 12:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Allegations vs. facts, academic vs. scientific[edit]

Different Wikipedia entries on Schmitt's plagiarized thesis should refer to the story in the same way. At this point, it is not an allegation (meaning "a claim or assertion that someone has done something illegal or wrong, typically one made without proof"). There is no doubt about the misconduct --- whether or not it was in good faith is immaterial. In January, it was an allegation, by now and for the next 10 years and after (Wikipedia guiding principle), it remains a fact. Secondly, a plagiarized thesis is *academic* and not scientific misconduct. (The latter would be a plagiarized publication, falsified experimental data, and such, committed as a bona fide researcher.) On the other hand, the article about Pal Schmitt could be balanced better by reducing the section on his resignation (university withdrew the degree after hvg.hu published the allegations, and Schmitt resigned after some controversy over the weekend after the university's announcement): this should not take up more space than his sport and political career. There is a whole Wikipedia article devoted to the resignation for those who want to know more. Szentendrei (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pál Schmitt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:33, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pál Schmitt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:58, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pál_Schmitt&oldid=1205203059"