![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
Editors trying to add references to Tufton street, please seek consensus on talk first. At the moment there is a developing story with scant sourcing about LGBA having an office at Tufton Street. This is not "headquarters". Their address is given at companies house and the register of charities. Void if removed ( talk) 11:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
This is not NPOV - other organisations share this address. Article's source for "only occupied by right-wing orgs" quote goes to random Twitter user, citing wikipedia. See talk.
shared with some of the UK’s most extreme right-wing conservative groups.It then lists examples, none of which are false. Quoting someone else saying "only occupied by right-wing orgs" does not mean the source itself is saying that. Their claim that "some" right wing orgs occupy the building is not circular or dependent on that tweet and it seems disingenuous to conflate the contents of the article with a single quoted tweet.
representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.
I should point out that the address with Companies House is not actually Kemp House any more; they moved their registered address a hundred yards down the road to 124 City Road (Fergusson House). Fergusson House is a five-story building hosting about 8,000 companies, so it's pretty clearly a virtual office for people who need an address in central London for whatever reason (see also: how half a million companies are all legally headquartered in a quarter-acre of office space in Delaware).
This begs the question: if the LGB Alliance are registered at Fergusson House — which is clearly not their actual office space — why is Ofcom sending mail to them at Tufton Street? It's completely possible they're just availing themselves of convenient physical office space, but as that person quoted in the PN piece said, "it's Tufton Street, not a bloody WeWork".
That said, we're verging into OR a little here. But the point remains that the most recent source of the LGB Alliance's physical location is Ofcom (which is, admittedly, a primary government source, but so is CH), then that's probably the "more correct" address. Sceptre ( talk) 21:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
That same month, it was reported that LGB Alliance shares office space at 55 Tufton Street with several right-wing groups promoting climate change denial and anti-immigration politics, including……… etc.This implies that LGBA is actually sharing offices with the other groups, whereas all the PinkNews article supports is that they have office space in the same building as the other groups. So I am amending the wording accordingly, to
…LGB Alliance has office space at 55 Tufton Street, a building also occupied by several right wing groups….Sweet6970 ( talk) 12:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
The article quotes a random Twitter user, who cites Wikipedia, for the claim the building is "only occupied by right-wing orgs".Void, can you please stop this, where you claim without any foundation, that our sources only get their information from unreliable sources themselves, and that it all comes back to Wikipedia. Nowhere else works like Wikipedia, where citations are given as "evidence". Normally, people don't cite source for their information at all, and when people do give links, like that Twitter user did wrt Tufton street, it isn't "here's the sole evidence for my claim" but "Ha ha look this address is so notorious for being the home of extreme right wing groups, it even has its own Wikipedia page". Anyone in the UK with modest knowledge of UK politics is well aware of 55 Tufton St, and certainly doesn't rely Twitter or Wikipedia to know this. The article cited the twitter users for added flavour, demonstrating the opinion on the internet, and not for the facts of the article. They also cited Twitter when supplying the "explanation" that LGB Alliance offered for their address. Our sources are allowed to do that.
Twitter users, however, have criticised the idea that the office space is simply convenient..." Of course, there's the overall issue of doxing that the Pink News article represents, but that's an issue for another page. Homeostasis07 ( talk/ contributions) 00:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Twitter users, however, have criticised the idea that the office space is simply convenient..." In any case, I've asked the question on Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Clarification_on_the_publication_of_business_addresses. We should hopefully have clarification on the overall issue soon. Regards. Homeostasis07 ( talk/ contributions) 01:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
To clear up - I added this section because, at the time, there was a breaking story just before xmas with very poor sourcing, and I wanted to discuss how to approach it. Editors were adding information based on documents released under FOI on Ofcom's website, and claiming a released letter addressed there meant that 55 Tufton Street was the one and only "headquarters" of LGB Alliance. Time has passed, and there are better sources and at least some of the claims have been watered down/balanced with a response. I think the fact that there was/is a controversy about the address is inescapable and needs a mention. I am agnostic as to whether 55 Tufton Street should be listed as an address in the about box - but since it is still not their address with Companies House or the Charities register, or on their own website, at least it now isn't in the lede and isn't claimed to be their only address, or their "headquarters". Coming back to the mention in the body though, I am not sure what purpose is served by listing five specific organisations, two of which are defunct, to illustrate why the address is controversial? This list is not straightforwardly derived from a single source but appears to be editorial selection combining two sources (and I note that both OpenDemocracy and PinkNews erroneously list orgs at that address who are not). Why those five? Why mention the defunct BrexitCentral and Leave Means Leave as if they are current residents? Why list any? I think it is enough to say, eg "an address controversial for hosting an influential network of right-wing libertarian lobby groups and think tanks, specifically relating to Brexit and climate science denial.". Given that the next sentence is a denial of any connection to any of them, I don't think preceding that with five specific, arbitrarily chosen organisations is NPOV - it comes across as over-egging. Also, I wonder if their actual statement is a better source than Pink News' third hand reporting of it. Void if removed ( talk) 10:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
including Migration Watch…etc. should be deleted. Sweet6970 ( talk) 12:12, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
That same month, it was reported that LGB Alliance had office space at 55 Tufton Street, a building also occupied by several controversial right-wing groups promoting climate change denial and anti-immigration politics.[existing citation 48]. LGB Alliance denied having links to the groups, stating "the office was chosen because it's handy, flexible, and that it became available at the right time".[existing citation 49]This shorter sentence still conveys the same core information, without the trivia on who exactly the other tenants are. If readers are interested in the other tenants, then they can read the main article for that building. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 19:02, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
Editors trying to add references to Tufton street, please seek consensus on talk first. At the moment there is a developing story with scant sourcing about LGBA having an office at Tufton Street. This is not "headquarters". Their address is given at companies house and the register of charities. Void if removed ( talk) 11:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
This is not NPOV - other organisations share this address. Article's source for "only occupied by right-wing orgs" quote goes to random Twitter user, citing wikipedia. See talk.
shared with some of the UK’s most extreme right-wing conservative groups.It then lists examples, none of which are false. Quoting someone else saying "only occupied by right-wing orgs" does not mean the source itself is saying that. Their claim that "some" right wing orgs occupy the building is not circular or dependent on that tweet and it seems disingenuous to conflate the contents of the article with a single quoted tweet.
representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.
I should point out that the address with Companies House is not actually Kemp House any more; they moved their registered address a hundred yards down the road to 124 City Road (Fergusson House). Fergusson House is a five-story building hosting about 8,000 companies, so it's pretty clearly a virtual office for people who need an address in central London for whatever reason (see also: how half a million companies are all legally headquartered in a quarter-acre of office space in Delaware).
This begs the question: if the LGB Alliance are registered at Fergusson House — which is clearly not their actual office space — why is Ofcom sending mail to them at Tufton Street? It's completely possible they're just availing themselves of convenient physical office space, but as that person quoted in the PN piece said, "it's Tufton Street, not a bloody WeWork".
That said, we're verging into OR a little here. But the point remains that the most recent source of the LGB Alliance's physical location is Ofcom (which is, admittedly, a primary government source, but so is CH), then that's probably the "more correct" address. Sceptre ( talk) 21:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
That same month, it was reported that LGB Alliance shares office space at 55 Tufton Street with several right-wing groups promoting climate change denial and anti-immigration politics, including……… etc.This implies that LGBA is actually sharing offices with the other groups, whereas all the PinkNews article supports is that they have office space in the same building as the other groups. So I am amending the wording accordingly, to
…LGB Alliance has office space at 55 Tufton Street, a building also occupied by several right wing groups….Sweet6970 ( talk) 12:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
The article quotes a random Twitter user, who cites Wikipedia, for the claim the building is "only occupied by right-wing orgs".Void, can you please stop this, where you claim without any foundation, that our sources only get their information from unreliable sources themselves, and that it all comes back to Wikipedia. Nowhere else works like Wikipedia, where citations are given as "evidence". Normally, people don't cite source for their information at all, and when people do give links, like that Twitter user did wrt Tufton street, it isn't "here's the sole evidence for my claim" but "Ha ha look this address is so notorious for being the home of extreme right wing groups, it even has its own Wikipedia page". Anyone in the UK with modest knowledge of UK politics is well aware of 55 Tufton St, and certainly doesn't rely Twitter or Wikipedia to know this. The article cited the twitter users for added flavour, demonstrating the opinion on the internet, and not for the facts of the article. They also cited Twitter when supplying the "explanation" that LGB Alliance offered for their address. Our sources are allowed to do that.
Twitter users, however, have criticised the idea that the office space is simply convenient..." Of course, there's the overall issue of doxing that the Pink News article represents, but that's an issue for another page. Homeostasis07 ( talk/ contributions) 00:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Twitter users, however, have criticised the idea that the office space is simply convenient..." In any case, I've asked the question on Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Clarification_on_the_publication_of_business_addresses. We should hopefully have clarification on the overall issue soon. Regards. Homeostasis07 ( talk/ contributions) 01:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
To clear up - I added this section because, at the time, there was a breaking story just before xmas with very poor sourcing, and I wanted to discuss how to approach it. Editors were adding information based on documents released under FOI on Ofcom's website, and claiming a released letter addressed there meant that 55 Tufton Street was the one and only "headquarters" of LGB Alliance. Time has passed, and there are better sources and at least some of the claims have been watered down/balanced with a response. I think the fact that there was/is a controversy about the address is inescapable and needs a mention. I am agnostic as to whether 55 Tufton Street should be listed as an address in the about box - but since it is still not their address with Companies House or the Charities register, or on their own website, at least it now isn't in the lede and isn't claimed to be their only address, or their "headquarters". Coming back to the mention in the body though, I am not sure what purpose is served by listing five specific organisations, two of which are defunct, to illustrate why the address is controversial? This list is not straightforwardly derived from a single source but appears to be editorial selection combining two sources (and I note that both OpenDemocracy and PinkNews erroneously list orgs at that address who are not). Why those five? Why mention the defunct BrexitCentral and Leave Means Leave as if they are current residents? Why list any? I think it is enough to say, eg "an address controversial for hosting an influential network of right-wing libertarian lobby groups and think tanks, specifically relating to Brexit and climate science denial.". Given that the next sentence is a denial of any connection to any of them, I don't think preceding that with five specific, arbitrarily chosen organisations is NPOV - it comes across as over-egging. Also, I wonder if their actual statement is a better source than Pink News' third hand reporting of it. Void if removed ( talk) 10:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
including Migration Watch…etc. should be deleted. Sweet6970 ( talk) 12:12, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
That same month, it was reported that LGB Alliance had office space at 55 Tufton Street, a building also occupied by several controversial right-wing groups promoting climate change denial and anti-immigration politics.[existing citation 48]. LGB Alliance denied having links to the groups, stating "the office was chosen because it's handy, flexible, and that it became available at the right time".[existing citation 49]This shorter sentence still conveys the same core information, without the trivia on who exactly the other tenants are. If readers are interested in the other tenants, then they can read the main article for that building. Sideswipe9th ( talk) 19:02, 13 January 2023 (UTC)