Talk:Mette Frederiksen

Untitled

Media Current events belong does not belong in a biography. It is therefore recommended to create a separate article on this. There is also invited to a read through of the the article by a second administrator for impartial reading. --Eyvind.Lyberth.Nielsen (talk) 18:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I did not add the final paragraph, I only removed the more gratuitous language of the original and added a source. I did my best in that regard—take a look at the original paragraph, which was, frankly, libelous—but I do not live in Denmark and am not familiar with the story. I felt, however, that your original edit was excessive. I do not mind if the final paragraph is removed, but the rest is non-controversial and ought to remain. Prose is always better for a reader than a series of lists and I see no reason why additional material should not be added to the current text.

I would encourage you to make any changes that you feel are necessary, especially to the problematic section, but be mindful of the manual of style. Rje (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I can see your point, but I meant that the structure in the danish version was more "wiki" with TOC and recommended textual structure, (and also it is most current in biographical details), that's why I copied the structure (plus the most current details) into the english page.

But of course the danish and the english version can divert:)

The pasus about an ongoing political accusation for unethical political sentiment against the political party program is not significant for her biography. I respect the actuality, but I still think it more belongs in its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyvind.Lyberth.Nielsen (talk • contribs) 20:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

The general practice is to do that only where an individual's article is too big and the event has enough coverage to merit its own article, neither of which is the case. To be honest, I think it is too soon to have that paragraph at all—it is too hard to tell at this stage whether this is a flash in the pan or something more significant—but I cannot really say how big the story is in Denmark. I will look at the Danish article and translate anything that is not in the English article into prose. I might have to do that tomorrow, but I'll let you know when I've done it. Best wishes, Rje (talk) 20:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Link

Link to "personal homepage" at the bottom is a website called "Erhvervsnyhederne", supposedly a news website. Is this really her personal page?

No, that is not her personal website. But a domain with her name redirects to erhvervsnyhederne.dk, to an article about her, a profile about her. I have changed the link and the title in it. --EileenSanda (talk) 00:33, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Mette Frederiksen - 2010.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Mette Frederiksen - 2010.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:11, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mette Frederiksen. 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/20100509174927/http://politiken.dk/politik/article965267.ece to http://politiken.dk/politik/article965267.ece
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.b.dk/politik/socialdemokrater-vil-forbyde-koebesex

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:06, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

"Right" on immigration?

The article mentions her reason for wanting a stricter immigration policy: “For me, it is becoming increasingly clear that the price of unregulated globalisation, mass immigration and the free movement of labour is paid for by the lower classes.” Doesn´t this show that her reason for changing the policy is left wing rather than right wing? Many right wingers want more liberal immigration policies because they want to reduce the salaries (social dumping), and if possible, create ethnic tensions between different groups of workers. There is nothing inherently "left wing" about a liberal policy on immigration. On the contrary. Oddeivind (talk) 21:18, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

By that same logic Donald Trump is a leftist cause he talks about jobs as reasoning for institutionalized xenophobia and racism. On the contrary... anti-immigration and phrases like "unregulated globalisation" HAVE NEVER been a part of a left wing vocabulary. Instead, those are well known "values" and racist dog whistles of the far right. And so is salting the article with the words like "liberal", trying to paint a different interpretation to the information presented, without actually attributing it to any source. --31.176.200.38 (talk) 16:47, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Without a source for improving the article, what you are doing is discussing the subject with your own personal opinions, which is not what the TP's are for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.29.156 (talk) 12:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

9/11 and migrant crisis?

Frederiksen also became increasingly sceptical of liberal mass immigration as she believes it has had negative impacts for much of the population, a more pressing issue since at least 2001 after the 11 September attacks which intensified during the 2015 European migrant crisis.

I don't understand why 9/11 is brought up here. How does it relate to mass immigration?__Gamren (talk) 09:45, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Possible attempt to become next Secretary General of NATO

How should we treat the speculations about Frederiksen becoming next Secretary General of NATO? Is has practically been confirmed by Lars Løkke, all the media is talking about it, the prime ministers of Norway and Belgium are all talking about how good she will be at it and it is according to several political analysts shadowing over anything else she has been doing politically for the last months.

I tried to write this:

On 21 april 2023, the Norwegian newspaper Verdens Gang stated that Mette Frederiksen is a serious candidate to become next Secretary General of NATO after Jens Stoltenberg, claiming to have it confirmed by sources on a "high diplomatic level". Frederiksen continuously, as anticipated by the press, stated that she was not a candidate for the office like former Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen also did leading up to him becoming NATO Secretary General in 2009. On 10 May, Fogh himself mentioned Frederiksen as a in play. On 23 May, a White House meeting between Frederiksen and American president Joe Biden was announced for 5 June, further igniting speculations. AAt a NATO summit on 30 May, Norwegian prime minister Jonas Gahr Støre stated, "I could spend a long time speaking well of Mette Frederiksen". On 31 May, Frederiksen's coalition partner former Prime Minister of Denmark and current Minister of Foreign Affairs Lars Løkke Rasmussen warned Frederiksen against taking the job due to the political situation in Denmark, according to political analyst Hans Engell practically confirming the rumors. Marginataen (talk) 11:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

As per WP:RUMOUR, Wikipidia is not suitable for presenting unconfirmed rumours about what various persons might or might not "attempt" to do, nor is it an undiscriminate repository for media speculations, cf. WP:NOT. --Økonom (talk) 07:26, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

All right. Makes sense. Thanks, @Økonom Marginataen (talk) 09:57, 6 June 2023 (UTC)