![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I'm going to move the page to Strongperson (politics). If anyone objects, I guess then can move it back, but please message me.100110100 09:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
The term strongman is merely an example of journalese, a term with no clear meaning and not used in general or academic talk or writing. It belongs in a dictionary, not in Wikipedia. --The Four Deuces (talk) 19:48, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
The article currently lists Gandhi as an example of a strongman. This doesn't seem to pass the straight-face test, and it was added with no discussion, citation, or any apparent reason, so I'm deleting it. In the highly unlikely event that anyone does have evidence for Gandhi being a strongman, by all means, bring it up. dcd139 (talk) 06:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I have an idea for the article: what is the origin of the term? When was it first used? --Blue387 (talk) 02:39, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I am not even going to look at the sources where they call Hugo Chavez authoritarian, dictator, strongmen, whatever. It is an insult to my country, Venezuela, who most of you don't even know where is located, when you say we have an authoritarian regime. Chavez is so authoritarian and that is why all Venezuelan private media say everyday that Chavez is an assassin, a corrupt, mentally ill, dictator, etc.201.248.91.192 (talk) 20:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Since this term is almost always at least somewhat pejoratively, I think it's irresponsible to list people here, living or not, unless we have a source for their being labeled a strongman. I've just removed all such entries. I'll list them here for anyone who wants to find sources and restore them: Augustus, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Mobutu Sese Seko, Suharto, and Rafael Trujillo. --BDD (talk) 16:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi, it seems that there are certain people taking an advantage of the editing section. There is not a single document that refers Park Chung-hee or Rhee Syng-man as dictators. And even if there is it must be stated that these people are one, and that in scholarly writing that they are indeed the same as the other on that Strongman category. And I do not think times is a good source for the judgments on people because it is simply an expression not a scholarly statement. And I doubt that they even care whether other foreign people expressed bad or good. Please make sure that the source provide are valid and legit.
Thank you, Regards 2607:F8F0:C10:FFF:200:5EFE:CE57:B636 (talk) 07:52, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Why is there even a list of political figures in this page? The entire list should be removed. Was Abraham Lincoln a 'strongman'? It would depend on whether you asked a Yank or a Rebel. The first would say he was democratically elected under a free constitution. The second would say the states had a right to leave the constitution and were being forced into submission and that Lincoln was, therefore, a strongman. You can argue either side and they're both contentious. So what is the point of having such a list in this page in the first page? So people can bicker over whether Sigmund Rhee was a dictator who put people in concentration camps... or whether that makes FDR a dictator for violating the US constitution and putting Americans in concentration camps (specifically those of Japanese descent). Obviously FDR will never be put on this list, so this is nothing more than a popularity contest and who can cite the most sources. Was Yanukovich a 'strongman' in Ukraine when he was democratically elected and choose to leave office rather than use violence? Those in power in Kiev now would say he was a strongman regardless. There countless such examples... such an attack page serves no purpose. 173.79.251.253 (talk) 15:53, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Though some of his decisions with regard to extension of term length, may be questionable, I don't believe he falls into the category of "generally referred to as strongman". Apart from that single (and quite POV) source, I have never seen him be called a "strongman" or dictator, and he certainly doesn't belong on the same list with Mao, Stalin and Pinochet. I added the "dubious" tag, but feel free to remove it if you can prove me wrong. --Medizinball (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
I don't want to add anything since it might get removed. I assume there is a reason why Hitler isn't listed? 99.45.166.113 (talk) 03:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
This edit caught my eye. The edit removed a cite-supported mention of Juan Perón from the article section headed Political figures referred to as "strongmen", saying "Peron didnt ruled by force, his was elected President in two democratic elections and doesnt even fit the term's description".
The removed supporting cite [5] Refers to peron as, "the Argentinian strongman who died in 1974". Another source [6], currently cited in the WP article about Peron, is titled Argentine Strongman's corpse disturbed again. Clearly, Peron has been referred to as a "strongman". I am guessing that there are additional sources out there referring to Peron as a "strongman".
However, the article's lead section says, "A strongman is a political leader who rules by force and runs an authoritarian regime.", and has said this for quite some time.
Since pronouncements by reliable sources trump expressions of editorial opinion by WP editors, I've reverted the edit removing Peron. However, it appears to me that the section header is confusing in light of the info in the atricle lead. Perhaps the inclusion criteria for the table should be clarified in the article. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:38, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Why no Mussolini? Franco? Tito? They are some of my favorite strongmen.--75.101.48.89 (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Why no Adolf Hitler? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.239.203.124 (talk) 10:07, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Why no Jiang Zemin, Hashim Thaci? They are some flamboyant and recognized political strongmen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.193.155.238 (talk) 23:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
They are both could be characterized as a Strongman — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.193.155.238 (talk) 23:41, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Strongman is at best a colloquial term. It is not interchangeable with "dictator," as dictator has a historical precedence to it in the Roman Empire, just as "tyrant" had precedence in Ancient Greece. (However, I don't advocate the removal of the phrase "The term is often used interchangeably with "dictator", but differs from a "warlord"." as "often used" identifies it as subjective, so that part is fine - but the point is "Strongman" has no historical precedent unlike dictator; so it's an insult first and foremost, not a political title that now carries a negative connotation) While all have come to be used to mean "a political leader whom I do not like", just because someone is disliked by the authors of an encyclopedia is not a valid reason for that encyclopedia to attach a title which does not have any equivalency to historical uses of that title. I have no problems with the article "Strongman (politics)" existing. It is a concept which is common enough to merit inclusion on wikipedia. However, judgement of political regimes based on a word that is, by this article's own admission, is not dependent on a fixed definition but rather on how it is used by certain people to describe their view of a particular regime. To quote: "A strongman is not necessarily always a formal head of state or head of government; sometimes journalists use the term to describe a military or political figure who exercises far more influence over the government than a constitution allows." This definition is completely fine, but inherently biased. I can see clearly that all leaders in the list have sources, but so what? So what if one journalist calls someone a strongman? If tomorrow a journalist in the American South calls Abraham Lincoln a strongman due to the Suspension of Habeas Corpus - which is a completely valid criticism for someone to make about Lincoln - are we to include Lincoln in this list? I would say that'd be absurd, but given the way this article is right now, an editor might believe himself justified in adding Lincoln's name to this list, and the result might be an edit war or stupid argument that last weeks. To avoid that mess, let's just delete it right now. I am not saying any particular person does not belong on the list or that any of the sources are invalid. Who is on the list and why is irrelevant because the list itself is what's the problem. A reporter's judgement of a political figure should go in that politician's article, not here. This list does nothing but parrot someone else's judgement, however valid that may be, without any context whatsoever. If other people want to add that context of how a poltiical figure got labelled a "strongman," go for it, but right now this article looks like it was written by someone with a third grader's understanding of the world, separated into "good guys" and "bad guys". Just because we sit here in the democratic west does not mean we should assume moral superiority over every authoritarian in the world, because if we did do that, I'd hope we'd apply similar criticism to every monarchy in history and include their rulers on this list. Charlemagne killed 4000 Saxons at Verdun. Does that meet the definition of "Strongman" or is he just a man of his times? I'd say we shouldn't pass judgement so flippantly, because then we'd be little better than North Korea's propaganda ministry. Wikipedia can do much better than that and this article can either be made less biased with the list's removal, which is what I'd prefer, or much more informative by changing the list to include information on what exactly was the circumstances behind labelling the individual a "strongman." Otherwise you get people like the one above this one, saying that this list should include "that one guy I don't like". We all don't like a certain political figure! The opinions of editors, and sources not given appropriate context, don't belong on Wikipedia. Well written analysis of the facts does belong on Wikipedia, and you are welcome to add it to this article, but in my opinion that's too much work to salvage what is by the article's own definition a subjective list dependent on whether or not a reporter uses the particular word "Strongman" as apposed to just "tyrant" or "dictator." 50.45.222.236 (talk) 23:31, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Strongman (politics). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed 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).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:14, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Strongman (politics). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed 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).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:45, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually not all strongman are dictators. Golluman96 (talk)
Some of the strongman with citations should be removed from the page. For example, David Cameron, Theresa May, Donald Trump and Justin Trudeau should be removed. Marxistfounder (talk) 13:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Come ahhhhhn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.45.16.190 (talk) 23:11, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
President Donald Trump is not either strongman or dictator. This list should be removed. Marxistfounder (talk) 13:43, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoStrongman (politics) has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2602:304:CF85:81C0:E544:CDAC:A670:E414 (talk) 17:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This edit requesttoStrongman (politics) has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2602:304:CF85:81C0:E544:CDAC:A670:E414 (talk) 12:41, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Murph9000 (talk) 13:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
She is reputed and famous by her uncompromised political and administration style, and named as The Iron Lady by the public. Thus, she can be counted as a strongman leader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.183.119.210 (talk) 06:32, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
The last part of the sentence (after especially):
The term is often used interchangeably with "dictator" in the western world, but (...) commonly lacks the negative connotations especially in some Eastern European and Central Asian countries.
is clearly a display of bias by whoever wrote it. I hope most people are aware that Eastern European and Central Asian countries do not use English as their native language. I'm not even sure how to precisely translate "strongman" into the Eastern European language I speak, let alone what its supposed connotations are. I suspect that whoever wrote it just based their judgement on a (partly true) western stereotype of Eastern Europe and Central Asia as places with current or historical dictatorships. But the presence of dictatorships in a given area says nothing about common perception of the word "strongman" in English, or the existence of words in the native language which somehow approximate "strongman" without negative connotations. I think the part after "especially" should either be removed, or made more precise/specific with references, explaining what exactly is meant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.50.12.162 (talk) 15:16, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Zman19964 Removed all the names from the article. We can't just accuse people of being strongman. There are more strongman and people in the article shouldn't be called them. Trump, Andrew Jackson, And for could be considered strongman. In addition Margret Thatcher was called the Iron Lady. I suggest we just it as I left it, as a definition. 11:40, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
People need to stop readding that list.Apollo The Logician (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Strongman (politics). 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:
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:49, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that the list accurately depicts the actual definition of Strongmen as many of the sources for some of the politicians listed are from rather biased sources or the word "Strongman" is taken out of context. Examples of this include the two New Zealand Prime Ministers formally listed here, both of whom were not dictators or even authoritarian and neither ruled by force, Yet because of these a b sources they are considered to be the equivalent of South American Dictators. I think that this list should be renamed, as "Political figures referred to as strongmen" seems to end up listing many people who do not fit the description.
Including this...
136.158.7.225 (talk) 02:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Strongman (strength athlete) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)