Talk:Willem Aantjes

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Willem Aantjes article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Untitled

This article should mention that the highly respected Loe de Jong made a blunder. The allegations were later found to be unfounded. Andries (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the allegations were NOT unfounded, they were factually correct in every detail except that he was a member of the Germaansche SS and not the Waffen SS. The current section is a disgusting POV whitewashing of Aantjes' past, clearly written by a sympathizer and not offering sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.238.249.71 (talk) 15:19, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

POV dispute

Currently, the "World War II controversy" section is written to fully exonorate Aantjes, adding strongly POV statements like "assumed that Aantjes had joined the Germaansche SS out of mere opportunism or sympathy for the Nazi ideology or the Dutch collaborating fascist National Socialist Movement in the Netherlands which was not the case" while not providing ANY sources or citations. This section needs to be rewritten in a neutral, encyclopaedic fashion and not as a whitewashing of Aantjes' past. 62.238.249.71 (talk) 15:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Someone removed the POV-tag, but did not address the issues mentioned or explain the action on the talk page here. That is against policy. The problem remains: a highly pro-Aantjes slanted explanation of the events is given, but NO SOURCES are provided. That is highly unencyclopaedic and violates NPOV. Tag restored. 62.238.249.71 (talk) 09:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, anonymous ip, here are 2 sources: [1] and [2]. Translate it, and see if you can put it into the article. If not, I'll give it a try. Best regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 15:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]