This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Justin Barrett article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The sentence, "Barrett, as a self-described 'right-wing republican',[36] attracted the support of former Provisional IRA volunteer and Sinn Féin national executive member Gerry McGeough who defected to Barrett's campaign.[37]
" is misleading. Reference 36 is An Phoblacht in April 2004, which calls him a "right-wing, self-styled republican" (not the same thing as a self-described 'right-wing republican'), but doesn't anywhere suggest that he would be attractive to IRA or Sinn Féin members. Reference 37 is a May 2004 story of how Gerry McGeough is defecting, but not because he sees Barrett as a republican, but rather because he supports his "Catholic patriotism". To splice the two together like that is to add two and two to make five, or, in Wiki parlance,
synthesis. I'm taking out the first part of that sentence. Even with it in, it doesn't belong anywhere in the lead.
WP:LEAD says that the lead "serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents." That Barrett is leader of the far-right National Party is an adequate introduction to the article. Saying in the second sentence that he is a "self-described 'right-wing [[Irish republicanism|republican]]'" does not summarise any important part of the article.
Scolaire (
talk) 17:46, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Central discussion here on the removal of content and replacement with flowery prose more suited to an election leaflet. In the meantime, reverted to status quo veriosn per WP:BRD. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 08:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
(Ah - someone beat me to it!) Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
The article says Barrett supports giving abortion doctors the death penalty, but the only source is an article about an interview published by comedian Jim Jeffries.
It's recently been documented that Jeffries slices and rearranges the statements of interviewees to put words in their mouths:
A Jim Jeffries interview (or an article based on one) is not a reliable source.
But no fear! With such a clear position, surely Barrett has made similar statements elsewhere, so we just have to get a reliable source and then everything's fine.
(Or are we to believe that Barrett, of the National Party, gave this opinion as an eternal exclusive to an Australian, in England, for broadcasting in the US?)
Get a reliable source. Great floors ( talk) 18:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Frankly, it seems that the admins of this wikipedia page are politically motivated and never take any criticisms into account. I’ve watched this page’s changes for 2 years now and it’s clear to see that there is a select few, may I add foreign... admins who constantly revert 95% of changes. Some changes are made by those actually knowledgeable in Irish politics; yet, these are reverted by 2 foreign admins constantly. Surely... the admins of this page should be Irish and knowledgeable? Furthermore, these admins seem dead set on representing Mr. Barrett in the worst way possible with misleading and bad wording of titles, paragraphs and phrasing. RMedb ( talk) 19:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Not sure where to post this, but is this sentence credible? It states there is no source for the video, but then quotes from it. Is there a better way to phrase this? Or maybe find a link to the original vid? "In the run-up to the election, she was allegedly targeted in a since-deleted video by Barrett. In the video, he indicated that if his party would gain power, he would work to strip her of her citizenship, despite the fact she had been born in Ireland and lived there since birth"
edit: found a first hand vid. Maybe update the wiki to quote this vid instead of the 'allegedly' part https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQpDWURTOTI&feature=youtu.be — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:8084:513d:ee80:a5a7:56de:d887:d71d ( talk • contribs)
The article says that Mr. Barrett is a nationalist -- would it not be more accurate to say that he 'claims to be a nationalist' there is after all no evidence for his nationalism at all other than his assertion that he is a nationalist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.158.66 ( talk) 14:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the addition, Guliolopez. I didn't add one myself because it's clear from the Electoral Act that everyone running for election has to pay a deposit, and can forfeit it if they don't do well, and I really didn't think that needed referencing. You're right, much better to include an explicit one. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 12:49, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
The description of Justin Barret political leaning as 'far right'is incorrect. The correct description is 'Conservative'. 78.19.10.250 ( talk) 20:32, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Bastun, am I missing something in my readings of WP:TWITTER? It appears to say that Twitter can be used as a source of information by people about themselves. The poster here appears to be Mark Malone rather than Justin Barrett, so I don't think it's a reliable source in this case. If I'm missing something here do let me know but otherwise I don't think this is suitably sourced for inclusion. — ser! ( chat to me - see my edits) 11:10, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm wondering about the the latest Examiner article that mentions Barrett and saying what's in the photo that identifies him. I mean - it's Barrett, and he's wearing a replica Nazi SS greatcoat. I can see how WP:SYNTH might apply, as Ser! says, or possibly WP:OR - but also there's WP:SKYISBLUE. I'd say at this stage the Examiner is likely to be the only source that covers this (unless it's in one of the Sunday papers), and unfortunately a search for "Justin Barrett Nazi" returns this page and its mirrors, and a lot of results talking about Nazi gold :-) Worth a question on WP:RS/N? Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Recently, Justin Barrett started a political group (?) named Clann Éireann that seeks to be a secondary group to the National Party. Actually, a lot of this is just me guessing because it is unclear to me what the organization's purpose is. In the "launch speech" given on YouTube, Barrett claims that he will soon have full control over the National Party again but Clann Éireann will be the main focus. I'm not sure it's worth any addition to the article yet but it's worth looking out for. Additionally, it doesn't seem like there's a news article out there about it yet. 173.0.34.229 ( talk) 20:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
The latest edits were rolled back by Ser. With respect, I think the version I had made earlier today had edits which were relevant but which are not given the prominence deserved. Once a public figure moves into activities like outright Holocaust denial, I think that should be foregrounded in their wiki article. Would there be support for using a label like 'neo-Nazi' at this point, using a page like Richard B. Spencer as a precdent/example of this. Also with regards to Ser's question on who cares what James Reynolds thinks, I do think that condemnation was relevant as it indicates reasons underlying the split within the NP. Mikebarrett0 ( talk) 16:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Justin Barrett article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The sentence, "Barrett, as a self-described 'right-wing republican',[36] attracted the support of former Provisional IRA volunteer and Sinn Féin national executive member Gerry McGeough who defected to Barrett's campaign.[37]
" is misleading. Reference 36 is An Phoblacht in April 2004, which calls him a "right-wing, self-styled republican" (not the same thing as a self-described 'right-wing republican'), but doesn't anywhere suggest that he would be attractive to IRA or Sinn Féin members. Reference 37 is a May 2004 story of how Gerry McGeough is defecting, but not because he sees Barrett as a republican, but rather because he supports his "Catholic patriotism". To splice the two together like that is to add two and two to make five, or, in Wiki parlance,
synthesis. I'm taking out the first part of that sentence. Even with it in, it doesn't belong anywhere in the lead.
WP:LEAD says that the lead "serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents." That Barrett is leader of the far-right National Party is an adequate introduction to the article. Saying in the second sentence that he is a "self-described 'right-wing [[Irish republicanism|republican]]'" does not summarise any important part of the article.
Scolaire (
talk) 17:46, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Central discussion here on the removal of content and replacement with flowery prose more suited to an election leaflet. In the meantime, reverted to status quo veriosn per WP:BRD. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 08:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
(Ah - someone beat me to it!) Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:00, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
The article says Barrett supports giving abortion doctors the death penalty, but the only source is an article about an interview published by comedian Jim Jeffries.
It's recently been documented that Jeffries slices and rearranges the statements of interviewees to put words in their mouths:
A Jim Jeffries interview (or an article based on one) is not a reliable source.
But no fear! With such a clear position, surely Barrett has made similar statements elsewhere, so we just have to get a reliable source and then everything's fine.
(Or are we to believe that Barrett, of the National Party, gave this opinion as an eternal exclusive to an Australian, in England, for broadcasting in the US?)
Get a reliable source. Great floors ( talk) 18:10, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Frankly, it seems that the admins of this wikipedia page are politically motivated and never take any criticisms into account. I’ve watched this page’s changes for 2 years now and it’s clear to see that there is a select few, may I add foreign... admins who constantly revert 95% of changes. Some changes are made by those actually knowledgeable in Irish politics; yet, these are reverted by 2 foreign admins constantly. Surely... the admins of this page should be Irish and knowledgeable? Furthermore, these admins seem dead set on representing Mr. Barrett in the worst way possible with misleading and bad wording of titles, paragraphs and phrasing. RMedb ( talk) 19:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Not sure where to post this, but is this sentence credible? It states there is no source for the video, but then quotes from it. Is there a better way to phrase this? Or maybe find a link to the original vid? "In the run-up to the election, she was allegedly targeted in a since-deleted video by Barrett. In the video, he indicated that if his party would gain power, he would work to strip her of her citizenship, despite the fact she had been born in Ireland and lived there since birth"
edit: found a first hand vid. Maybe update the wiki to quote this vid instead of the 'allegedly' part https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQpDWURTOTI&feature=youtu.be — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:8084:513d:ee80:a5a7:56de:d887:d71d ( talk • contribs)
The article says that Mr. Barrett is a nationalist -- would it not be more accurate to say that he 'claims to be a nationalist' there is after all no evidence for his nationalism at all other than his assertion that he is a nationalist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.158.66 ( talk) 14:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the addition, Guliolopez. I didn't add one myself because it's clear from the Electoral Act that everyone running for election has to pay a deposit, and can forfeit it if they don't do well, and I really didn't think that needed referencing. You're right, much better to include an explicit one. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 12:49, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
The description of Justin Barret political leaning as 'far right'is incorrect. The correct description is 'Conservative'. 78.19.10.250 ( talk) 20:32, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Bastun, am I missing something in my readings of WP:TWITTER? It appears to say that Twitter can be used as a source of information by people about themselves. The poster here appears to be Mark Malone rather than Justin Barrett, so I don't think it's a reliable source in this case. If I'm missing something here do let me know but otherwise I don't think this is suitably sourced for inclusion. — ser! ( chat to me - see my edits) 11:10, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
I'm wondering about the the latest Examiner article that mentions Barrett and saying what's in the photo that identifies him. I mean - it's Barrett, and he's wearing a replica Nazi SS greatcoat. I can see how WP:SYNTH might apply, as Ser! says, or possibly WP:OR - but also there's WP:SKYISBLUE. I'd say at this stage the Examiner is likely to be the only source that covers this (unless it's in one of the Sunday papers), and unfortunately a search for "Justin Barrett Nazi" returns this page and its mirrors, and a lot of results talking about Nazi gold :-) Worth a question on WP:RS/N? Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Recently, Justin Barrett started a political group (?) named Clann Éireann that seeks to be a secondary group to the National Party. Actually, a lot of this is just me guessing because it is unclear to me what the organization's purpose is. In the "launch speech" given on YouTube, Barrett claims that he will soon have full control over the National Party again but Clann Éireann will be the main focus. I'm not sure it's worth any addition to the article yet but it's worth looking out for. Additionally, it doesn't seem like there's a news article out there about it yet. 173.0.34.229 ( talk) 20:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
The latest edits were rolled back by Ser. With respect, I think the version I had made earlier today had edits which were relevant but which are not given the prominence deserved. Once a public figure moves into activities like outright Holocaust denial, I think that should be foregrounded in their wiki article. Would there be support for using a label like 'neo-Nazi' at this point, using a page like Richard B. Spencer as a precdent/example of this. Also with regards to Ser's question on who cares what James Reynolds thinks, I do think that condemnation was relevant as it indicates reasons underlying the split within the NP. Mikebarrett0 ( talk) 16:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)