Talk:Doug Christie (lawyer)

	Biography portal 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 articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Canada: British Columbia / Politics Low‑importance

	the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Category:Anti-Semitic people

Doug Christie has been removed from the category Category:Anti-Semitic people. Defending those accused of anti-Semitism does not automatically qualify the individual as being racist. Remember Wikipedia

reliable sources. Thank you. --Uncle Bungle 02:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Removed Category:Holocaust deniers for the same reason. I'm gonna try and see if this man has any history outside of defending Nazi's and advocating secession as he seems to garner more attention than the average looney lawyer would recieve.74.36.193.153 03:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He must have had far more than the 12 defendants that wikipedia seems to list. Maybe he is on an anti-semitic hit list due to probably 1% of his clients? Advocating secession in Canada would imply that the French are all looney - oui/no? For a looney lawyer he seems to win most of his cases - oui/no?159.105.80.141 17:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am now reapplying

talk) 05:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Respectable bodies still have to provide evidence to back their claims. The statements in the Toronto Now article are conclusions, not evidence. If you think the Toronto Now article provides evidence that Christie is anti-semitic or something like that then you are flat out wrong. If that's all the "evidence" you have, then I would remove Doug Christie from the wikicategory of anti-semitism. But I won't because I note that being listed in that category doesn't necessarily mean one is anti-semitic, a holocaust denier, or anything like that.24.85.194.206 (talk) 21:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is about referencing. If there is a bona fide, reliable reference that the Law Society reached a conclusion, that must be noted, regardless of what evidence they had or didn't have. A Sniper (talk) 03:31, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but quoting someone in an article, saying that "so-and-so believes this about person X and has made statement Y in that regard" and providing a source is way different from placing someone in a wikicategory. Once placed in the wikicategory, one loses the benefit of context. Someone cruising a wikicategory listing may see Christie's name under anti-semitism and wrongfully assume that he's anti-semitic despite the fact that no one has really presented any evidence of that fact. Essentially, placing someone in a wikicategory is a conclusion and that requires evidence, not just a source.

Again, and I emphasize this for casual readers who may find themselves reading this article: Read the Now article in full in which the law society is quoted. Also see this article where Christie states he isn't anti-semitic http://www.douglaschristie.com/Paterson.htm. No one has presented a source providing a solid evidentiary basis for the serious and arguably libelous claim that Christie, personally, is anti-semitic. See my earlier comments above. Christie seems to be correctly placed in a wikicategory "antisemitism" but for the wrong reasons. If there is a separate category for "anti semitic people" then it would definitely be _wrong_ to put Christie in that category.24.85.194.206 (talk) 03:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Seifert

Is there any article in English Wikipedia that has information about Michael Seifert, whom Christie represented on an extradition matter? Seifert was convicted in Italy, in absentia, of crimes at the Bolzano Transit Camp. The Canadian courts allowed the extradition and the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear an appeal, but I have not found anything online as to whether he has been extradited to Italy yet. [1][2][3] I proposed a translation of the Italian article it:Campo di transito di Bolzano but I wonder whether Seifert is notable enough to have his own article in Wikipedia. --Mathew5000 (talk) 01:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has now created the article at Michael Seifert (SS guard). It could still use some expansion; there are links [4] here to some court decisions and news articles. --Mathew5000 (talk) 08:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What a hatchet job this article is. The article is a verbal attack on the lawyer, dragging his name thru the mud in good wikipedia tradition. In the USA its said that everyone is entitled to a defense. Apparently this doesn't apply to people accused of anti-semitism. He's a lawyer, he should not be attacked for defending people wikipedia editors don't like. That sounds more like something Americans might write about the NAZI or Soviet systems of justice. While I don't know if its actually true of their systems, its obvious from this article that lawyers should consider carefully who they will defend. So apparently wikipedia doesn't believe everyone is entitled to a defense. Pgg804 (talk) 06:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Doug Christie (lawyer). 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 true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

Sourcecheck

}}).

This message was posted before February 2018.

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) 04:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]