Talk:Nicolas Sarkozy

Photo

Man, that is one ugly photo for some guy who likes to get in view a lot. Seems to be a trend here, bad photos for politicians.

Obvious reasons for this:

• We don't have access to such people. They are generally behind barriers/reporters/police/bystanders/supporters/opponents. Only accredited journalists and photographers have a chance of getting good photographs, in general. The few Wikipedians that meet high-level politicians for work/official purposes (yes, that happens) don't want to look like "weirdoes" by taking photographs.
• We can't use the photos of accredited photographers, with few exceptions (Agencia Brasil or US government, but not every politician makes top-level official visits to the US or Brazil).
• So we use the photographs on, say, their official parliamentary site or similar. Perhaps the parliament services take these photographs from the same mug shots as the acces badges? David.Monniaux 17:22, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I had forgotten about the part about copyrights. I happen to live in France, and this guy seems to have his face everywhere, so the example shown on the page seemed subpar to his standards. Didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. Apologies

Oh, my feathers are not ruffled! I'm thinking of simply emailing all major parties and ask for authorized photographs of their leaders. If they refuse, we'll stick with crappy photographs. David.Monniaux 19:14, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Talking about photos from official political party sites... This photo and this one are from u-m-p.org and are far more Sarkozy's style... Exaton 02:46, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Caution

Nicolas Sarkozy is a probable contender for the next presidential election in France. He has attracted much attention from the national and international press, with some evident bias for or against him. This, I think, should incite us to prudence when relating information about him.

I have strived to provide precise factual information, quoting articles in the mainstream press. On some occasions, I have removed vague statements (like things about Sarkozy confronting France's powerful unions), because they do not mean much. David.Monniaux 16:30, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Minister of Interior again in 2005

I hesitate to update the page myself, as David.Monniaux seems to be pretty protective of it (and undoubtedly rightly so), but after President Chirac's official speech at prime time this evening, it is practically official that Sarkozy is Minister of Interior again, in addition to having the honorific title of Minister of State (as already indicated)... Exaton 02:50, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I admit that I'm somewhat protective, because Sarkozy is quite a controversial personality and lots of biased things are written on him in either direction.

So far, Chirac has announced that Sarkozy would be minister of State (honorific title), but his exact attributions are yet unknown — remember that Sarkozy has already been twice in Finances, once in Interior. It is rumored that he is again at Interior, but nothing public is known for sure.

That's why I think we should stick to our current formulation: he's going to be minister of state (sure) and he's rumoured to be in charge of Interior. David.Monniaux 15:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Living in France, I can assure you that what with the political situation, with Sarkozy (and his own goals for the 2007 presidential election) battling the new Prime Minister de Villepin (forever a Chirac supporter) for the choice of other ministers et al... There really wasn't ever any doubt on the inside, only from the outside -- it's been as official as it was going to get, because he (Sarkozy) has very simply maneuvered himself into a quasi-Vice Prime Minister position :) Anyway, now it is official, since we're going to be such sticklers : http://www.elysee.fr/elysee/francais/actualites/a_l_elysee/2005/juin/nouveau_gouvernement.30037.html for example. Exaton 20:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've added the relevant information. I'm sure there will be discussion about this sentence : His collaborators do not all agree that his return to the government in June of 2005 will help him in this, although it is widely recognised that his position, influence and popularity currently make him the third man at the country's head.. Now, that is perfectly true and neutral. Some excellent editor might want to make it appear more so, however. Exaton 20:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jewish origins

I'm not quite sure that Sarkozy's mother is a Jew. I read she had Jewish origins — but this may simply mean her father was a Jew. David.Monniaux 18:10, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

According to Jewish law, a Jew is someone whose mother was a Jew; there is no dispute about this. However, if only Sarkozy's mother's father was a Jew, then neither she nor her son were Jews by Jewish law. By the way, did Sarkozy's mother have a name? Right now the article makes it appear that the the father was the only parent who had a name, and that the mother was merely an anonymous egg donor. Jayjg ^(talk) 18:12, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

These sources indicate that she is a Greek Jew: [1][2] Jayjg ^(talk) 18:20, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually, these sources don't say that his mother was a Jew. I quote: his mother is of Greek-Jewish descent. Being of Jewish descent means being a descendant of Jews — perhaps only from the father line. Deriving from this that she was a Jew is an audacious step.

As for her name, I really don't know.

I see one good method for settling this: how about asking Sarkozy himself? David.Monniaux 18:33, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've removed all speculations about Sarkozy being a Jew, because we do not have any source saying his mother was a Jew. David.Monniaux 18:38, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Greek-Jewish origin" means Greek Jew in English idiom. I'm restoring it. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:47, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

First, if his mother is a Jew, then he is a Jew; and she is a Jew if her mother was a Jew. There's no dispute about that. I found a source here [3] but don't know how authoritative it is. Does he say anything about it in his book? The article I found says:

Sarko’s father, Pal Nagy Bosca y Sarkozy, was a Hungarian aristocrat who fled Budapest in 1944, settled in Paris, acquired French citizenship, married a Parisian lady whose father was Greek and mother was Jewish. SlimVirgin 18:51, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

Hem. The "source" quoted is an article that is an obvious editorial piece (with an open anti-French feeling). I would not consider it a source of information. David.Monniaux 19:27, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree that it doesn't look particularly authoritative. SlimVirgin 19:41, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

His mother's name seems to be Andrée Mallah. [4] A lot of the stories I'm finding say that Sarkozy refers often to his background, because he wants to stress that he himself has an immigrant background, so he's likely to have mentioned it in his book. I've also found a couple of sources saying that his mother's father was Benedict Mallah from Salonica, who emigrated to France in the early 20th century and converted to Catholicism, but again it's hard to judge how authoritative these sources are. David, do you have a way of e-mailing Sarkozy to ask him? SlimVirgin 19:56, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)

Well, Sarkozy is the head of a well known party, with a web site and a surface mail address. On the other hand, in this country, inquiring about one's religion and personal details is often considered to be rude. An alternative should be to read Sarkozy's book (is that the one where he discusses faiths and the republic?). David.Monniaux 05:49, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes, in English it would be Republic, Religions, Hope, and I believe it's a collection of interviews he gave to Thibaut Collin, a philosopher, and Philippe Verdun, a monk. It doesn't seem to have been translated into English based on searching Amazon (U.S., UK, and Canada). SlimVirgin 06:17, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

"Benedict Mallah" doesn't sound like a very Greek name to me. It should be remembered that, before World War II, Salonica was a city with a (Sephardic) Jewish plurality. Seems plausible that the Mallah's were Sephardic Jews from Salonica. john k 02:55, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The thing is, we so far haven't seen anything saying his mother was a Jew. Serious sources say "of Greek Jewish origins", which is very vague — for instance, the Debrés (Jean-Louis Debré, Michel Debré etc.) are of Jewish origin, yet are not Jews themselves. David.Monniaux 06:32, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think the information brought in by Hardouin (kudos!) settles it all: Nicolas Sarkozy's mother's father was a Jew, but not his mother's mother, and thus his mother is not a Jew, and thus he is not a Jew. (See what I was saying: "Greek-Jewish origins" does not mean "Greek Jew".) David.Monniaux 20:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Quotes and such...

• "cozy with big business" - If that's what they say then quotes are in order. Question: does Wiki prefer curly quotes? (And if so, what kind?)
• ...in France. - Cut the sentence because only everything before the dot appears to be a ‘fact’ (quote from article).
• They also state... - this implies that the rest of the sentence is the opinion of the left-wing opposition. The rest of the quotes are therefore unnecessary and can be misinterpreted as ‘sarcasm quotes’ (sorry for the disfortunate term).

Let's all do our best to make this article as neutral as a politics-related article can be! Gambatte! Shinobu 21:33, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Reverting Origins section

I am reverting the Origins section at the beginning of the article, for the sake of chronological order. For the most part, this section is just a translation of the French Wikipedia article, where the Origins section is also at the beginning of the article. The argument that people are more interested in his political career than in his past is a bit fallacious. After all, if people are not interested in the Origins section, they can just skip it. That's why there's a summary table at the beginning of the article, so that people can access directly the section they are most interested in. Also, note that the Origins section is important to understand some key aspects of Nicolas Sarkozy's personality and mentality. Last but not least, this article has already attracted a lot of people wondering about Nicolas Sarkozy being a Jew or not, and surely there will be still more people in the future coming in the article just for that Jewish question. The Origins section answers that Jewish question quite clearly, so I think that's another reason to leave it at the beginning of the article. Hardouin 15:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One option for writing articles is to order things by decreasing importance. This section on origins contains some undoubtedly interesting bits, but also contains some pathos as well as some revelations about Nicolas Sarkozy's father that sound like out of the tabloid press. Indeed, I wonder how much about this is from authoritative sources; whether Nicolas Sarkozy himself acknowledges it; etc. Are Wikipedia readers primarily interested in Paul Sarkozy's philandering? David.Monniaux 16:22, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Decreasing importance is totally POV. Different people may have different ideas about what's important, and what's not. Chronological order, on the other hand, is NPOV. Another NPOV ordering would be reverse chronological order, but so far I have never seen any Wikipedia article adopting reverse chronological order. As for Paul Sarkozy's "philandering", as you call it, it is a word I'm sure many native English speakers don't even know the meaning. If you mean Nicolas Sarkozy father's abandonment of his family, it is certainly important in the sense that it helps understand Nicolas Sarkozy's personality today. I would totally oppose the mention of the father's behavior if it wasn't relevant to understand the son's personality. But in this case it is important.Hardouin 16:35, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Philandering" is a polite term for "womanizing" or, more vulgarly, "screwing around". Google for "Clinton" and "philandering", you'll be enlightened. :-) David.Monniaux 16:45, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have lived for many years now in English speaking countries, with only English speaking friends and English speaking relatives around me, and I have never ever heard the word "philandering", not even once. So it must really not be a very frequent word. Hardouin 18:02, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard it spoken. It tends to be used as a kind of hypocritical, polite term... David.Monniaux 18:26, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Also, the sources are not fuzzy as you seem to impply. Quite the contrary, they are public and available to all: official état civil records which show the various marriages of the father, and the books of Nicolas Sarkozy himself, where he talks about his childhood and his family situation. Hardouin 16:35, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Official records certainly don't say Paul Sarkozy was a "Don Juan". Was this information found in a book written by Nicolas Sarkozy, or by "investigative" (i.e. muckracking) journalists?

("Fussy" is not the word I would have used here. "Dubious" is probably better.) David.Monniaux 16:45, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If you don't like the word Don Juan, feel free to replace it with another word. There are plenty of choices in English: womanizer, woman chaser, Casanova, masher, flirtatious man, etc. Let's not have one tree hiding the forest from our view. The fact remain that this man was a womanizer, and we are not here to libel him, but we are here to explain a family context in which Nicolas Sarkozy grew up (a family context that Nicolas Sarkozy has fully disclosed in his books). Hardouin 18:02, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That's the answer I wanted to hear: Paul Sarkozy's womanizing was explained by Nicolas Sarkozy himself. That makes it worthy of being mentioned on Wikipedia (I would have hesitated if it were material from the trash tabloid press). David.Monniaux 18:26, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

While I think the origins section is probably a bit long, I find it annoying that people are simply reverting back to the older version. There's a lot of information there, and there should at least be discussion here as to why it shouldn't be in the article. If some of it is to be removed, I'd prefer a fine-tuned approach rather than simply reverting to the old version. john k 04:49, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I myself didn't revert to the old version - just moved the section down the article. David.Monniaux 07:20, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nagy-Bosca

Are you sure about this Nagy-Bosca thing? I mean, the article says the name was originally Nagy-Bocsa, and then Paul changed it to Nagy-Bosca. This sounds strange to me, is the name more French-looking just because he switched the s and the c?--80.98.236.197 20:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There was an error. In the French name it is Bocsa, c preceding s, as in Hungarian. I have corrected it. The difference between the Hungarian and the French name is that in the French name there are no more accute accents, and also Sarközy precedes Nagy-Bocsa, and finally "y" was replaced by "de". Hardouin 22:40, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Style

Hi all. I tried to make the article flow a little more smoothly without altering the meaning of the text. I would much appreciate it if someone more knowledgeable would check for me on this. Thanks. Psp 23:07, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)