This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kate Forbes 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 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in Scottish English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Kate Forbes. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Kate Forbes at the Reference desk. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, 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. |
I do not think this warrants a paragraph as a genuine feminist first milestone. The Finance secretary Derek Mackay resigned on the day of the budget speech and Kate, as a junior finance minister working for Mackay, was asked at the last minute to read out the prepared budget speech rather than the government cancelling the budget. Whilst I agree she read it out very nicely I do not think that it warrants as a true first female to present the Scottish budget as she was not the Finance secretary. I agree that this event has boosted her political career prospects hugely but, as a former trainee accountant age 29, she did not design the budget or compose the speech but was merely asked to read it out. Whilst she did present the budget by reading it, in this context the word 'present' implies the speaker is the Finance minister (similar to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in England who 'presents' their budget) Update: Subsequently Kate has been appointed Finance secretary so my above comment is rather pedantic. I notice that she qualified as an accountant in Oct 2016, over a year after she became an MP so I don’t think my ‘trainee accountant’ description was inaccurate though it may now seem rather derogatory. Andrew ranfurly ( talk) 14:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:07, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Why? There seemed to be no reason. Scientelensia ( talk) 09:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Wikipedia is not a news or current affairs tracker. Sparkle1 ( talk) 11:59, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
It is time to disengage here. It is futile to continue this as it is clear that this not going to be resolved. If you wish to take this further please use the dispute resolution process. The selective number of articles presented do not mean that they are precedential or even in compliance. There may be overriding reasons for the inclusion of these issues in the articles of Prime Ministers and Party leaders. I am not engaging in a general debate on other articles here. Plesse escalate this if you wish to take this further using the dispute resolution process. Sparkle1 ( talk) 12:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Scientelensia and Sparkle1. I am responding to the third opinion request in this matter. Having reviewed the edits in question and your discussion, my third opinion is that the disputed material regarding political views should be included in the article. The material is highly relevant to the subject of the article. Citations are from appropriate secondary sources not primary sources. The material is relatively short and the discussion constrained - it does not make the article overly long, nor is it indiscriminate. The material does not violate the policy in WP:NOTEVERYTHING. The material is written in an encyclopedic tone and does not push a point of view or seem to campaign for the politician; rather the politician's actions and positions speak for themselves. If there is a concern that only certain encyclopedically-relevant views of the politician have been picked, the correct remedy in this instance is to add further material. For these reasons, my view is that you should include the material. I hope these perspectives assist you in a collegial resolution of the issue. JArthur1984 ( talk) 14:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC) |
From the source:
"In an interview with Sky News she said she personally believes that "sex is for marriage" and that having children outside of marriage "would be wrong according to my faith".
However, she said it is entirely up to other people what they do, adding: "In a free society you can do what you want"."
I assume good faith, but this is not a political view. She's expressing her own faith and views. To put it another way, Muslim, Sikh, some Christian and some health-conscious politicians in the UK refuse to drink alcohol and believe it to be gravely harmful. It would be at best a conspiracy theory, and at worst bigotry, to conclude that their policy is to take alcohol from others. Unknown Temptation ( talk) 21:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Currently the article includes a translation of Kate's name into gaelic. I don't believe this is warranted unless I'm missing some reasoning behind it. She's not from one of the gaelic speaking parts of scotland and I've not been able to find any source except this article where she is referred to by her full name translated into gaelic. I have found one instance where she was called "Ceitidh Fhoirbeis" by one of her parliamentary colleagues in a debate. I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts on this. Brocksbane ( talk) 23:49, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Did she work at Oxfam? The statement that she did was added by a single-edit IP here, on 20 Feb. It's based on something published on 15 Feb by ghgossip.com, seemingly based in Ghana, which states that its source is... ghgossip.com. In a familiar cycle, a journalist at The Irish Times appears to have re-worded this Wikipedia article, thereby creating a 'reliable source' on 25 Feb for the information that was previously based on what looks to me like an unreliable source. I haven't seen Forbes herself stating that she worked at Oxfam; is there good evidence that she did? EddieHugh ( talk) 18:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kate Forbes 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 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in Scottish English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Kate Forbes. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Kate Forbes at the Reference desk. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, 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. |
I do not think this warrants a paragraph as a genuine feminist first milestone. The Finance secretary Derek Mackay resigned on the day of the budget speech and Kate, as a junior finance minister working for Mackay, was asked at the last minute to read out the prepared budget speech rather than the government cancelling the budget. Whilst I agree she read it out very nicely I do not think that it warrants as a true first female to present the Scottish budget as she was not the Finance secretary. I agree that this event has boosted her political career prospects hugely but, as a former trainee accountant age 29, she did not design the budget or compose the speech but was merely asked to read it out. Whilst she did present the budget by reading it, in this context the word 'present' implies the speaker is the Finance minister (similar to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in England who 'presents' their budget) Update: Subsequently Kate has been appointed Finance secretary so my above comment is rather pedantic. I notice that she qualified as an accountant in Oct 2016, over a year after she became an MP so I don’t think my ‘trainee accountant’ description was inaccurate though it may now seem rather derogatory. Andrew ranfurly ( talk) 14:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:07, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Why? There seemed to be no reason. Scientelensia ( talk) 09:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Wikipedia is not a news or current affairs tracker. Sparkle1 ( talk) 11:59, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
It is time to disengage here. It is futile to continue this as it is clear that this not going to be resolved. If you wish to take this further please use the dispute resolution process. The selective number of articles presented do not mean that they are precedential or even in compliance. There may be overriding reasons for the inclusion of these issues in the articles of Prime Ministers and Party leaders. I am not engaging in a general debate on other articles here. Plesse escalate this if you wish to take this further using the dispute resolution process. Sparkle1 ( talk) 12:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Scientelensia and Sparkle1. I am responding to the third opinion request in this matter. Having reviewed the edits in question and your discussion, my third opinion is that the disputed material regarding political views should be included in the article. The material is highly relevant to the subject of the article. Citations are from appropriate secondary sources not primary sources. The material is relatively short and the discussion constrained - it does not make the article overly long, nor is it indiscriminate. The material does not violate the policy in WP:NOTEVERYTHING. The material is written in an encyclopedic tone and does not push a point of view or seem to campaign for the politician; rather the politician's actions and positions speak for themselves. If there is a concern that only certain encyclopedically-relevant views of the politician have been picked, the correct remedy in this instance is to add further material. For these reasons, my view is that you should include the material. I hope these perspectives assist you in a collegial resolution of the issue. JArthur1984 ( talk) 14:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC) |
From the source:
"In an interview with Sky News she said she personally believes that "sex is for marriage" and that having children outside of marriage "would be wrong according to my faith".
However, she said it is entirely up to other people what they do, adding: "In a free society you can do what you want"."
I assume good faith, but this is not a political view. She's expressing her own faith and views. To put it another way, Muslim, Sikh, some Christian and some health-conscious politicians in the UK refuse to drink alcohol and believe it to be gravely harmful. It would be at best a conspiracy theory, and at worst bigotry, to conclude that their policy is to take alcohol from others. Unknown Temptation ( talk) 21:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Currently the article includes a translation of Kate's name into gaelic. I don't believe this is warranted unless I'm missing some reasoning behind it. She's not from one of the gaelic speaking parts of scotland and I've not been able to find any source except this article where she is referred to by her full name translated into gaelic. I have found one instance where she was called "Ceitidh Fhoirbeis" by one of her parliamentary colleagues in a debate. I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts on this. Brocksbane ( talk) 23:49, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Did she work at Oxfam? The statement that she did was added by a single-edit IP here, on 20 Feb. It's based on something published on 15 Feb by ghgossip.com, seemingly based in Ghana, which states that its source is... ghgossip.com. In a familiar cycle, a journalist at The Irish Times appears to have re-worded this Wikipedia article, thereby creating a 'reliable source' on 25 Feb for the information that was previously based on what looks to me like an unreliable source. I haven't seen Forbes herself stating that she worked at Oxfam; is there good evidence that she did? EddieHugh ( talk) 18:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)