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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly
I have edited this article because it had said the exact opposite of what the given sources said. The article had said:
On 27 May 1971 he was recused for having admitted his active membership of a political organisation of the extreme Right.
However, according to the source (ref 2) Biotti was required to recuse at the request of Calabresi's lawyer who claimed that in a private conversation Biotti had admitted he was a supporter of a left wing militant party, something Biotti vigorously denied. Note also, this source (Giornalismo italiano, Volume 4. Monadori, 2009) states that Calabresi's lawyer suddenly asked for the recusal because Biotti had ordered the exhumation of Pinelli's body and that Biotti doubted that Pinelli had died jumping from the window of the police station, as Calabresi claimed. Reference 2 says pretty much the same thing. I'm also going to add the material from A.C. Milan website concerning Biotti's dates of birth and death. He was a director of the club. Voceditenore (talk) 15:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch, Voceditenore, right for left, stupid error on my part, thank you for picking it up. That said, where does the stuff about a private conversation come from? I had the greatest difficulty finding anything resembling a reliable source about this business (there's a seriously non-neutral account of it here) and I don't see anything about that in those I did find. The Civiltà cattolica ref appears to say no more than "il giudice Biotti è stato ricusato dal difensore del Calabresi, avv Lener, per aver ammesso di essere militante di partito di estrema sinistra e di avere idee politiche contrarie a quelle della parte civile". What did I miss? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Justlettersandnumbers. You didn't miss anything. The "private conversation" comes from the other sources I consulted which recounted the evidence presented by Calabresi's attorney when asking for the recusal, just to make sure it was left and not right and what the background was. I've now added them to the article. It turns out that the account in the Italian Wikipedia (here) while somewhat exaggerated is not far off from what the sources I've consulted have said, and they seem quite reliable to me, i.e. very notable publishers and newspapers, albeit by authors with mostly left-wing sympathies. Actually the whole affair is slightly more complicated than the way I've presented it here. The accusation of being in collusion with Lotta Continua, came from a private conversation Biotti had with Calabresi's attorney, Michele Lener, some months before concerning a separate case before the court of Milan in which Calabresi was suing Pio Baldelli for defamation. Lener claimed he wrote it down at the time. But he sat on it for over 5 months and then pulled it out for the Pinelli/Calabresi case to get Biotti recused. Voceditenore (talk) 15:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 79.31.142.172. I understand that you are upset about the error, but it was an honest mistake by Justlettersandnumbers and it has now been fixed. The problem is that this article was created by an editor with the account name Alec Smithson who is globally blocked for causing serious problems on many Wikipedias. For example, this is his block record on the Italian Wikipedia. When that editor was banned, he began using a lot of IPs to continue editing and cause still more disruption. Since you were also editing from an IP, several editors, not just Justlettersandnumbers, thought you were Alec Smithson returning to cause trouble. That is why your edits were removed. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. Please don't prove me wrong and please do not make any more threats of legal action on Wikipedia. That is strictly forbidden. I assume you are the same person who edited the article and this talk page before as the IP 79.17.164.12 who was blocked for making a legal threat. You cannot edit using another IP if you are blocked. You need to wait until the block expires. If you have any questions about your block or need help in appealing that block, contact me on my talk page. I will not revert your message. When your block expires, I strongly urge you to register an account to avoid any further misunderstandings and to allow us to communicate with you. If you prefer, you can read some of these guidelines in Italian: it:Aiuto:Come registrarsi and it:Wikipedia:Non minacciare azioni legali. Voceditenore (talk) 16:17, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for your answer, however. I'm not Alex Smitson, I am a legal advisor, however this Justlettersandnumbers has blocked me too. I believe that if the sources are readable and real You can also have them written to the devil but they ve not to be removed.
What measures are taken for the behavior against the policy of Wikipedia by Justlettersandnumbers: no open discussions, vandalism, talk deleted, no possible to answer. Please it is your duty to check these. What happened looks at the steps was a very serious thing defamation. He has only benefited your intervention to correct the situation, but now audit and controls the activities of this Justlettersandnumbers, thanks for your activities.
Carefully I'll read your link. I agree with what you write, and I repeat myself.
Best R.
