397:
these accusations (eg evidence from, convicted criminal
Sigurdur Thordarson). An opening section should be kept concise, however that cannot be at the cost of fair treatment of persons concerned. Listing accusations without mentioning significant disagreements or counter accusations amounts to bias - simply including the odd alleging/alleged won’t correct this. I accept there is more balance at the end of the section, where we broach whether it was right for the US to bring the indictments at all, however, that does not address the questionable nature of specific accusations. Please note: I am not asking that every accusation we mention in the intro be followed by counter arguments, however, the reader should be made aware, from the start, that there are real controversies and some highly unusual circumstances involved.
927:(which is separated in part because of the constitutional significance—the legal debate on universal jurisdiction, and the appearance of bias issue regarding Lord Hoffman). In the former article, a similar amount of words are spent discussing the arrest and extradition proceedings in the UK as are then spent on the substantive criminal trials in Chile. Given the fact Assange got a plea deal from the US which was nodded through by a judge extremely quickly before sending Assange on to Australia, there's likely even
21:
311:
348:
223:
202:
126:
108:
136:
233:
77:
609:
toward featuring information supporting
Assange, and as a by-product, draw that information away from other articles. Certainly I don’t want to see a situation where there is hardly any information about the campaign to free Assange on his main page (it’s becoming a significant movement worldwide and deserves more than being largely tucked away in a side article).
469:
everybody, is the US going to really argue that the bit he testified to them is actually reliable in some way? There's no confirmatory backup that I know of. Anyway if we merge in the bits of the
Assange article dealing with the extradition hearing with Baraister that should also cover the indictment well.
564:
We could split the
Assange campaign and extradition fight into a new article. Theres lots of coverage of the Assange campaign that doesnt belong in the Assange article or this one, and some of the details of the extradition fight that could go there too. Most of the Assange campaign isnt on wikipedia
483:
The article didnt quote but I think it said some of it were lies. He had chat logs and copies of hard drives, and they took computers of hackers they raided so who knows what theyll try to use. But apparently none of the charges depend on anything from him in the indictment, so maybe the US will drop
449:
There's plenty of RS discussion of
Thordarson and he is not disparaged by the WEIGHT of RS that verify his actions and credibility. No WP page, including talk pages, should disparage or denigrate him or his actions, per NPOV and BLP. The epithet "convicted criminal Thordarson" is no differnt than the
657:
I was for having the extradition hearings under
Baraister here. Ar you mixing up what I said about the High Court which did not deal with any of the points in the indictment? I said they could all be left to the main article for the momentif this is about the indictment rather than the extradition.
608:
Assange is a controversial figure, and for that reason, it’s important that cases for and against him are represented in all articles, and even sections within articles. Some article titles may make that difficult: An article titled say: “Assange campaign and extradition fight”, will probably lean
535:
I know but it's not exactly true and you'll notice they never actually published it in
America. The whole point of all that business with Thordarson is to establish that Assange actively helped hack systems which is needed as a basis for many of the charges. This is also why so much is made of the
396:
In some instances, an introductory section is the only part of an article a casual reader will look at. The introduction to this article lists accusation, after accusation, made against
Assange – that is all well and good – however, in some instances there are significant controversies surrounding
625:
I don't want exerything replicated everywhere! I want the various sections have only one article dealing with them. This article and the proposed article though have the nasty problem of potentially covering current events - that should very much be avoided and just left to the main article. When
468:
I thought there was some mention of
Thordarson there but I can't find it now. Yes the intro could be culled I bit I think. As to Thordarson the interesting bit is that so many sections of the indictment seem to depend on him. And he has retracted his evidence. He has been thoroughly unreliable to
916:
In addition to the reasons already given, the article is as much about the detention and extradition proceedings in the United
Kingdom (and reactions to the entire matter) as it is about the indictment by the US authorities. A parallel to consider in terms of naming and article structure (though
626:
Assange is sent to America or freed then that will be a phase over with a nice cut off point. The Assange campaign article is just forking yet again unless it is campaign for a particular purpose which ends before current events.
696:
Could you please link to the section "Assange Campaign" that you are referring to? We have another discussion above about a merge and this suggests a split. I suggest these discussions proceed one by one and not in parallel.
674:. As that article makes clear, since Assange has been in prison, WikiLeaks has not been publishing very much. I have never seen a source which said that WikiLeaks was separate from Assange. Assange is clearly the boss.--
669:
While I think this proposal is well-intentioned, I don't think it is possible to have an article about the man which doesn't deal with the campaign, his legal battles etc. It is also very hard to separate Assange from
923:
640:
Assange's early life for instance in the main article is getting to the size where it is ideal for splitting off and having a short summary in the main article and has no problems aboutdplicating current events.
519:
In the indictment, Thordarson’s claims are used not as the basis for charges but as background for what Assange told Chelsea Manning, who as an Army soldier exposed classified information through WikiLeaks in
658:
That way also this article wouldn't become a fork where every current action got duplicated. Only deal with the indictment. This article does not do that all that much currently - it is more about responses.
594:
Yes. Relevant things chopped out could go into a stub or draft article. I think you wanted to keep extradition stuff out of this article and didnt like the extradition stuff that had been added.
963:
364:
717:
I agree with those who say the article is getting unwieldy - but we've got 'new' news, including calls from Australian lawmakers and Justice Caucus Democrats for his release. --
513:
806:
289:
988:
279:
895:
Yes I would concur with Jtbobwaysf that this article is about more than just the American criminal case and is in majority related to cases in europe.
918:
973:
178:
825:
184:
993:
870:
255:
791:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
514:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/julian-assange-extradition-appeal/2021/07/07/41bc3914-df2e-11eb-a27f-8b294930e95b_story.html
983:
431:
Thanks – I’m not looking for big changes, just a more balanced feel to the intro, so I may not add much more material (if anything).
978:
874:
246:
207:
329:
88:
832:– Assange pleaded guilty and the case is over. Page should be about US case and arrest and bail should stay for background
968:
950:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
782:
317:
149:
113:
58:
54:
325:
852:
the article relates to much more than the US, and much of it (or the majority) is related to EU and UK. Thanks!
376:
829:
792:
94:
839:
722:
599:
570:
526:
489:
422:
153:, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the
615:
437:
403:
62:
940:
904:
886:
861:
843:
819:
768:
741:
726:
706:
683:
679:
650:
635:
620:
603:
589:
574:
545:
530:
507:
493:
478:
461:
442:
426:
408:
254:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
936:
882:
857:
815:
702:
76:
754:
456:
380:
795:
after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
833:
737:
718:
663:
646:
631:
595:
585:
566:
541:
522:
503:
485:
474:
418:
382:
29:
20:
931:
to say about the American side of this case than there is for the trial of Pinochet in Chile. —
536:
allegations about Chelsea Manning sending Assange a password hash and him failing to crack it.
610:
432:
398:
900:
764:
675:
580:
Wouldn't it be better to fix up this article and chop down the Assange article a bit first?
378:
347:
932:
878:
853:
811:
698:
238:
451:
232:
222:
201:
957:
733:
659:
642:
627:
581:
537:
499:
470:
450:
epithet "convicted criminal Assange". Thordarson has not been convicted of perjury.
125:
107:
896:
760:
135:
228:
141:
131:
671:
53:)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
498:
Have a look through the indictment for 'Teenager' and judge for yourself.
417:
Ill wait to make any edits or other comments until youre done everything.
251:
924:
R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet
383:
341:
305:
154:
70:
15:
316:
On 4 January 2022, it was proposed that this article be
321:
964:
Knowledge (XXG) articles that use Australian English
759:Information of split request confusing. Disregard:
250:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
732:Is that anything to do with the indictment though?
183:This article has not yet received a rating on the
414:I think thats fair. It cant only be accusations.
755:Talk:Julian Assange#Suggested split and issues
917:obviously factually very different) would be
8:
781:The following is a closed discussion of a
196:
102:
33:, which has its own spelling conventions (
919:Indictment and arrest of Augusto Pinochet
877:have been notified of this discussion.
826:Indictment and arrest of Julian Assange
322:Indictment and arrest of Julian Assange
198:
104:
74:
518:
61:, this should not be changed without
7:
800:The result of the move request was:
264:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Politics
244:This article is within the scope of
147:This article is within the scope of
157:and the subjects encompassed by it.
93:It is of interest to the following
14:
989:High-importance politics articles
946:The discussion above is closed.
346:
309:
231:
221:
200:
134:
124:
106:
75:
19:
974:Unknown-importance law articles
753:Discussion of article split at
326:US indictment of Julian Assange
284:This article has been rated as
163:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Law
1:
994:WikiProject Politics articles
707:06:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
684:05:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
651:11:55, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
636:11:49, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
621:10:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
604:23:23, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
590:23:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
575:20:28, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
546:08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
531:23:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
508:23:21, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
494:23:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
479:23:09, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
462:17:19, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
443:16:45, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
427:16:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
409:09:11, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
267:Template:WikiProject Politics
258:and see a list of open tasks.
774:Requested move 17 July 2024
1010:
727:15:05, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
290:project's importance scale
185:project's importance scale
984:C-Class politics articles
941:18:25, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
905:16:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
887:16:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
862:10:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
844:08:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
820:09:31, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
769:22:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
283:
216:
182:
119:
101:
979:WikiProject Law articles
948:Please do not modify it.
921:and the related case of
830:United States v. Assange
788:Please do not modify it.
748:Article split discussion
742:21:35, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
166:Template:WikiProject Law
83:This article is rated
87:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
969:C-Class law articles
871:WikiProject Politics
392:Introductory section
247:WikiProject Politics
59:relevant style guide
55:varieties of English
57:. According to the
89:content assessment
30:Australian English
889:
810:
807:non-admin closure
389:
388:
370:
369:
340:
339:
304:
303:
300:
299:
296:
295:
270:politics articles
195:
194:
191:
190:
69:
68:
1001:
868:
804:
790:
713:Back in the news
618:
613:
560:Assange campaign
440:
435:
406:
401:
384:
361:
360:
350:
342:
328:. The result of
313:
312:
306:
272:
271:
268:
265:
262:
241:
236:
235:
225:
218:
217:
212:
204:
197:
171:
170:
167:
164:
161:
144:
139:
138:
128:
121:
120:
110:
103:
86:
80:
79:
71:
26:This article is
23:
16:
1009:
1008:
1004:
1003:
1002:
1000:
999:
998:
954:
953:
952:
951:
875:WikiProject Law
786:
776:
750:
715:
616:
611:
562:
438:
433:
404:
399:
394:
385:
379:
355:
310:
286:High-importance
269:
266:
263:
260:
259:
239:Politics portal
237:
230:
211:High‑importance
210:
168:
165:
162:
159:
158:
150:WikiProject Law
140:
133:
84:
63:broad consensus
12:
11:
5:
1007:
1005:
997:
996:
991:
986:
981:
976:
971:
966:
956:
955:
945:
944:
943:
910:
909:
908:
907:
865:
864:
823:
798:
797:
783:requested move
777:
775:
772:
749:
746:
745:
744:
714:
711:
710:
709:
693:
692:
691:
690:
689:
688:
687:
686:
655:
654:
653:
638:
561:
558:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
548:
516:
465:
464:
447:
446:
445:
415:
393:
390:
387:
386:
381:
377:
375:
372:
371:
368:
367:
357:
356:
351:
345:
338:
337:
330:the discussion
314:
302:
301:
298:
297:
294:
293:
282:
276:
275:
273:
256:the discussion
243:
242:
226:
214:
213:
205:
193:
192:
189:
188:
181:
175:
174:
172:
146:
145:
129:
117:
116:
111:
99:
98:
92:
81:
67:
66:
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1006:
995:
992:
990:
987:
985:
982:
980:
977:
975:
972:
970:
967:
965:
962:
961:
959:
949:
942:
938:
934:
930:
926:
925:
920:
915:
912:
911:
906:
902:
898:
894:
891:
890:
888:
884:
880:
876:
872:
867:
866:
863:
859:
855:
851:
848:
847:
846:
845:
841:
837:
836:
831:
827:
822:
821:
817:
813:
808:
803:
796:
794:
789:
784:
779:
778:
773:
771:
770:
766:
762:
758:
756:
747:
743:
739:
735:
731:
730:
729:
728:
724:
720:
719:Edwin Herdman
712:
708:
704:
700:
695:
694:
685:
681:
677:
673:
668:
667:
665:
661:
656:
652:
648:
644:
639:
637:
633:
629:
624:
623:
622:
619:
614:
607:
606:
605:
601:
597:
596:Softlemonades
593:
592:
591:
587:
583:
579:
578:
577:
576:
572:
568:
567:Softlemonades
559:
547:
543:
539:
534:
533:
532:
528:
524:
523:Softlemonades
521:
517:
515:
511:
510:
509:
505:
501:
497:
496:
495:
491:
487:
486:Softlemonades
482:
481:
480:
476:
472:
467:
466:
463:
460:
459:
455:
454:
448:
444:
441:
436:
430:
429:
428:
424:
420:
419:Softlemonades
416:
413:
412:
411:
410:
407:
402:
391:
374:
373:
366:
363:
362:
359:
358:
354:
349:
344:
343:
335:
331:
327:
323:
319:
315:
308:
307:
291:
287:
281:
278:
277:
274:
257:
253:
249:
248:
240:
234:
229:
227:
224:
220:
219:
215:
209:
206:
203:
199:
186:
180:
177:
176:
173:
156:
152:
151:
143:
137:
132:
130:
127:
123:
122:
118:
115:
112:
109:
105:
100:
96:
90:
82:
78:
73:
72:
64:
60:
56:
52:
48:
44:
40:
36:
32:
31:
25:
22:
18:
17:
947:
928:
922:
913:
892:
849:
834:
824:
801:
799:
787:
780:
752:
751:
716:
617:billets_doux
612:Prunesqualor
563:
457:
452:
439:billets_doux
434:Prunesqualor
405:billets_doux
400:Prunesqualor
395:
352:
333:
285:
245:
169:law articles
148:
95:WikiProjects
50:
46:
42:
38:
34:
27:
793:move review
676:Jack Upland
155:legal field
51:Labor Party
28:written in
958:Categories
933:Tom Morris
879:RodRabelo7
854:Jtbobwaysf
812:Quadrantal
699:Jtbobwaysf
142:Law portal
802:Not Moved
672:WikiLeaks
565:anywhere
512:Its WaPo
453:SPECIFICO
365:Archive 1
334:not moved
734:NadVolum
660:NadVolum
643:NadVolum
628:NadVolum
582:NadVolum
538:NadVolum
500:NadVolum
471:NadVolum
353:Archives
261:Politics
252:politics
208:Politics
835:Softlem
288:on the
85:C-class
43:program
39:realise
914:Oppose
897:Jorahm
893:Oppose
869:Note:
850:Oppose
761:Otr500
91:scale.
47:labour
35:colour
520:2010.
320:from
318:moved
49:(but
937:talk
929:less
901:talk
883:talk
873:and
858:talk
840:talk
816:talk
765:talk
738:talk
723:talk
703:talk
680:talk
664:talk
647:talk
632:talk
600:talk
586:talk
571:talk
542:talk
527:talk
504:talk
490:talk
475:talk
458:talk
423:talk
332:was
280:High
484:it
324:to
179:???
160:Law
114:Law
960::
939:)
903:)
885:)
860:)
842:)
828:→
818:)
785:.
767:)
740:)
725:)
705:)
682:)
666:)
649:)
634:)
602:)
588:)
573:)
544:)
529:)
506:)
492:)
477:)
425:)
45:,
41:,
37:,
935:(
899:(
881:(
856:(
838:(
814:(
809:)
805:(
763:(
757:.
736:(
721:(
701:(
678:(
662:(
645:(
630:(
598:(
584:(
569:(
540:(
525:(
502:(
488:(
473:(
421:(
336:.
292:.
187:.
97::
65:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
