Talk:Belgian Holocaust denial law
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Official translation
editDo we have a link to an official (for instance from the official website of the Belgian government) fully written out version of this law. Because people defending the law often point out that it is only to be used against people who made antisemitic comments as well. It would therefore be very relevant to provide a link on this article to the full version. Thanks. Evilbu 22:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
- There was an outdated link in the article to the unofficial translation at the website of the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism. The offical (Dutch, French and German) text isn't on the Belgian Government's website, yet. They only started with the 1998 laws, and the Negationism Law dates from 1995.
- I'm correcting the link. --LucVerhelst 08:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I seem to have found the official texts (French and Dutch) after all. I've added them. --LucVerhelst 11:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- As I understand it "lbr" is not an official government site, while "jurisdat" is? As this is an English article, we might need a link to an official English version of the law. (This is a very controversial topic, and people constantly question translations or sources about it.) But thanks for the links, it's already a major improvement!Evilbu 13:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I assume you mean "diversiteit.be" in stead of "lbr" ?
- "Diversiteit.be" is the website of the CEOOR, a government agency.
- "Jurisdat.be" is the portal site of the Belgian court system. It is an official government site.
- As English is not an official language in Belgium, there is no official English translation of the law, and there will never be one. --LucVerhelst 14:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- As I understand it "lbr" is not an official government site, while "jurisdat" is? As this is an English article, we might need a link to an official English version of the law. (This is a very controversial topic, and people constantly question translations or sources about it.) But thanks for the links, it's already a major improvement!Evilbu 13:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I got confused, sorry. "diversiteit" provides an English translation. Can it be considered an "official source" when it is on the site of a "government agency" (I mean how different is that from the "government" itself). I am Belgian too, I am well aware of the fact that English is not an official language here, but it is true that governmental sites like these [1] offer information in four languages. And because this law is controversial (and important, not only to Belgians) an official version in English might be interesting. However, I can only thank you very much for everything you have provided! (The reason I am so keen on finding an English version is because foreign supporters of laws like to twist the truth in order to make it appear this law only affects those who made antisemitic(=racist) comments too.)Evilbu 17:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I already saw on your user page that you are Belgian, but I nevertheless provided the information for our international friends on Wikipedia.
- Re: "official translation" : I didn't study law, but I believe that in legal language (in our country, anyway) an "official translation" is a translation that is approved by parliament. This has the advantage that the translated text can be used as a source in court.
- All federal laws are passed with the Dutch and French translations side by side. For the most important laws, there also is an official German translation, approved by the federal parliament.
- I can imagine that an official government body or an approved interpreter could produce an official translation in the non-judicial meaning, but I don't see the point. The only reason you would want an official translation is to use it in court, but there the "judicial" meaning of "official translation" would be applied. (And anyway, court cases are Dutch, French or German only in our country).
- What we need is a translation from a reputable source. I know that most of our far right "friends" will say that the CEOOR isn't reputable, but I believe that this is the closest we can get. --LucVerhelst 20:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Negationism and neologism
editI have moved and remaned "Belgian Negationism Law" to "Belgian Holocaust denial law", because the word Negationism is little used in English and when it is unlike the French word Le négationnisme it is not Holocuaust specific (see Negationism). So using it here particularly with a captial "N" in the title creates a neologism. --Philip Baird Shearer 15:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Belgian Holocaust denial law. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061012233408/http://www.diversiteit.be/CNTR/EN/legislation/Racism/leg_negation.htm to http://www.diversiteit.be/CNTR/EN/legislation/Racism/leg_negation.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312061427/http://www.juridat.be:80/cgi_loi/loi_N.pl?cn=1995032331 to http://www.juridat.be/cgi_loi/loi_N.pl?cn=1995032331
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061002161008/http://www.lbr.nl/?node=3374 to http://www.lbr.nl/?node=3374
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 04:53, 30 October 2016 (UTC)