Talk:Ursula von der Leyen

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

Image[edit]

@83.137.6.164: Hi, could you explain why you think the 2020 portrait is an incorrect representation? Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consultants topic[edit]

It seems wrong for this to feature twice in a chronologically ordered list.

The 'chronological list' layout is also hard to follow when you have [Time Period][Political group she was in][random topics for events during that time related to that group]: I think it deserves a table of contents, and once that makes the organization easier to see, it might benefit from some re-organizing. Future Contributor (talk) 06:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is wrong to feature it twice. I propose merging both sections into the latter one, so that the affair features at the time it came to light, not at the time the events actually happened, since it was the coming to light that had impact on/was relevant to her life. JackTheSecond (talk) 13:31, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pfizer-Scandal[edit]

The shadow negotiations of von der Leyen and Pfizer are classified documents of the Commission. This 35 Billion deal is the main scnadal of von der Leyen and in a national context, she had to had step back for this. This information should be content of the articel in an understandebal leaguage. --Sinomina2000 (talk) 11:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But her biography is the wrong place for it unless she is prosecuted and found guilty of misfeasance. There must be an article somewhere about executive actions taken (or not taken) during the covid epidemic, which is where it should go. WP:Wikipedia is not a soapbox. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 12:09, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The policy WP:BLP governs what may be said about living people, so it is not permissible to allege or insinuate criminality. But it is entirely unsurprising that Pfizer would insist on contractual confidentiality, because central buying policies by European countries mean medication prices that are significantly lower that those in the USA. To reveal its terms would damage its negotiation position elsewhere. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to get elected by telling stories ...[edit]

My insertion was deleted with the reason "no encyclopedic tone". Please build your opinion because I happen to find the reasoning symptomatic:

In the early monrning of that day it was published that she would care for a right of the parliament to initiate statutes[1] which she never did after she was elected.[2] The unability of the EU-parliament to initiate statutes like a real parliament is considered as a grave and dangerous defect.[3]

Maybe one should add that she was suddenly, shortly before she was about getting elected, quoted saying that she would care for the right of the parliament. That is possibly easier to understand and 'more encyclopedic'.

Yours, Karl Valensin

-06:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC) 2001:16B8:C3C2:4D00:C4D1:D53:49F6:D5DA (talk) 06:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and not, as one would expect, in a democracy by the EU-parliament is your personal opinion and violates WP:NPOV so I have reverted your edit. The second part of your edit has grammar problems and I am having trouble understanding it. What does it mean to care for a right? –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To add to what Novem Linguae wrote: the addition may be a legitimate one, you just have to change the way it is written. The part about the current system being a 'grave and dangerous' one for example is not about von der Leyen and therefore outside the scope of this article. (Also, was this reported primarily in German press, or? Because one of the articles you cite even says that the idea was an unpopular one in France.) JackTheSecond (talk) 11:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Michael Stabenow, Brüssel (2019-07-16), "Vor Wahl in Straßburg: So kämpft von der Leyen um Stimmen", FAZ.NET, ISSN 0174-4909, retrieved 2024-03-07
  2. ^ Markus Becker (2020-03-16), "Initativrecht: EU-Abgeordnete werfen von der Leyen Wortbruch vor", Der Spiegel, ISSN 2195-1349, retrieved 2024-03-07
  3. ^ Nicola Gundrum (2012-10-31), Ist die Gewaltenteilung in der Europäischen Union gewährleistet?, GRIN Verlag, ISBN 978-3-656-30021-2, retrieved 2023-07-28

Is this supposed to be a hagiography?[edit]

According to Josep Borell, the EU foreign policy chief, von der Leyen's approach to Palestine is nakedly pro-Israel and has done damage to the EU's standing in the world. This he said to El País, arguably to the top newspaper in Spain which more than fits the bill for a reliable source on Wikipedia. However, users User:Luxofluxo and User:Nillurcheier are trying to remove mention of Borell's very noteworthy views on von der Leyen's pro-Israel activism, with barely a semblance of good reasons, with the result that only positive appraisals of her are left in the entry. Is this how this entry is supposed to be? Peleio Aquiles (talk) 14:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read WP:NPOV. Then re-read your edit, and then make a detailed self-appraisal of that comment below based on WP:NPOV. Go through it line-by-line. Luxofluxo (talk) 14:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how people here had no problem with such nakedly POV language as, "the indiscriminate attacks by the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas", but think "Her refusal to criticize Israel's actions in Gaza" is too much, even though that's exactly how the press described the events at the time. Peleio Aquiles (talk) 10:33, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 to Luxofluxo, tone is the issue here JackTheSecond (talk) 14:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ursula_von_der_Leyen&oldid=1221181490"