This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mark Harper 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 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 page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Having undertaken a clean-up exercise, there have been a number of recent edits by Mr Harper and people associated closely with him. In the latest, there is a specific edit summary which asks that we do not change (actually, not include), certain information - hence my application of the WP:autobiography tag. Having looked further into this, I can understand why there may be some personal concern with regards a person associated with Mr Harper. In summary, I am happy that this request does not presently compromise WP:PILLARS, as the focus of this article is Mr Harper himself. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 10:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
This is unjustified censorship. The citation was given namely BBC Any Questions same day 10th Sept. I will revert and complain if any more such interference with my contribution.
P.S. this person naming him/herself as Peter Karlsen has since twice more reverted sound appropriate material on patently false grounds. This vandalism must cease else complaint will be made about Peter Karlsen's tampering designed to give a censored flattering account of Mr Harper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.172.129 ( talk) 00:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to propose that this section be renamed Notable issues. Mark Harper deals with many issues, this section clearly doesn't relate to them all - just those of note. Obscurasky ( talk) 22:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Here we go again! I reapplied the COI tag in light of the edits of anon 194.60.38.198 (traced by Wikipedia to the Houses of Parliament), who removed what could be perceived as "negative" text here, and added a huge amount of "positive" text - none of the later of which had any form of reference. I am not a constituent of Mr Harper, but the amount of negative/positive and highly biased editing seems high for even a political biography article. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 21:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, well tonight I have added some more refs, edited in/out stuff that I can't find/can find suitable refs for, and added some cite tags where there is a clear lack of refs. Resultantly, I have removed the autobiography tag. Still needs more referencing would be a fair summary. Rgds - Trident13 ( talk) 20:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
In light of more Anon/COI editting by HoP IP address 194.60.38.198, and in light of the discussion facilitated above by Guy ( Help!) this is the first of two sections I have added re parts of the current bio. As this was part of the stabalised biography post Mr. Sagar's complaint to the Wikimedia Foundation, I am disapointed that someone else now finds the need to remove this. Its significant as it was both well referenced, well commented on (particularly I feel in light of Harper's previous shadow role as disability spokeperson), and the neutral chair immediately suggested Harper's comment were "outrageous." It should presently be kept. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 15:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
This is the second of two new sections after more Anon/COI editting by HoP IP address 194.60.38.198 - see section "Disability comments." As an outsider, I can't see a bigger issue in the forest than this one. Further, Harper seems to be coming in for a lot of wider critic on his personal position with regards the issue. We don't need duplicate text between this article and the one on Hands off our Forest, and this article section only needs to cover comments made about Harper with regards the issue. Yes, I added the Porrit comment in this context, and editted that down to keep it encyclopedic: his critic of Harper goes further, but readers can access the whole article from reading the accompanying reference. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 15:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I've expanded this section a bit to include Atos' comments to the select committee. This is a crucial point: is it the provider or the dept that is responsible for what happens, especially when things go wrong? It's clear to me that most people who look at it dispassionately see that merely getting a new company to do basically the same thing is not going to change all that much.
NB The select committee heard from several witnesses - they didn't just form a view based on their own analysis.
-- Dr Greg Wood ( talk) 12:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I've 'streamlined' the whole article; I think it's tidier now and reads better.
-- Dr Greg Wood ( talk) 17:21, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
The article's quite long now, so I'm giving it a trim today.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mark Harper. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mark Harper. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Updated to 2019 election, and have given figures to two significant figures - but I imagine there is policy somewhere, so if in the light of policy any editor wishes to add more accuracy (at the cost of clarity of course, but there you go) then feel free :) Friendly regards to all, Springnuts ( talk) 15:51, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mark Harper 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 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 page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Having undertaken a clean-up exercise, there have been a number of recent edits by Mr Harper and people associated closely with him. In the latest, there is a specific edit summary which asks that we do not change (actually, not include), certain information - hence my application of the WP:autobiography tag. Having looked further into this, I can understand why there may be some personal concern with regards a person associated with Mr Harper. In summary, I am happy that this request does not presently compromise WP:PILLARS, as the focus of this article is Mr Harper himself. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 10:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
This is unjustified censorship. The citation was given namely BBC Any Questions same day 10th Sept. I will revert and complain if any more such interference with my contribution.
P.S. this person naming him/herself as Peter Karlsen has since twice more reverted sound appropriate material on patently false grounds. This vandalism must cease else complaint will be made about Peter Karlsen's tampering designed to give a censored flattering account of Mr Harper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.172.129 ( talk) 00:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to propose that this section be renamed Notable issues. Mark Harper deals with many issues, this section clearly doesn't relate to them all - just those of note. Obscurasky ( talk) 22:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Here we go again! I reapplied the COI tag in light of the edits of anon 194.60.38.198 (traced by Wikipedia to the Houses of Parliament), who removed what could be perceived as "negative" text here, and added a huge amount of "positive" text - none of the later of which had any form of reference. I am not a constituent of Mr Harper, but the amount of negative/positive and highly biased editing seems high for even a political biography article. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 21:55, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, well tonight I have added some more refs, edited in/out stuff that I can't find/can find suitable refs for, and added some cite tags where there is a clear lack of refs. Resultantly, I have removed the autobiography tag. Still needs more referencing would be a fair summary. Rgds - Trident13 ( talk) 20:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
In light of more Anon/COI editting by HoP IP address 194.60.38.198, and in light of the discussion facilitated above by Guy ( Help!) this is the first of two sections I have added re parts of the current bio. As this was part of the stabalised biography post Mr. Sagar's complaint to the Wikimedia Foundation, I am disapointed that someone else now finds the need to remove this. Its significant as it was both well referenced, well commented on (particularly I feel in light of Harper's previous shadow role as disability spokeperson), and the neutral chair immediately suggested Harper's comment were "outrageous." It should presently be kept. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 15:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
This is the second of two new sections after more Anon/COI editting by HoP IP address 194.60.38.198 - see section "Disability comments." As an outsider, I can't see a bigger issue in the forest than this one. Further, Harper seems to be coming in for a lot of wider critic on his personal position with regards the issue. We don't need duplicate text between this article and the one on Hands off our Forest, and this article section only needs to cover comments made about Harper with regards the issue. Yes, I added the Porrit comment in this context, and editted that down to keep it encyclopedic: his critic of Harper goes further, but readers can access the whole article from reading the accompanying reference. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 15:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I've expanded this section a bit to include Atos' comments to the select committee. This is a crucial point: is it the provider or the dept that is responsible for what happens, especially when things go wrong? It's clear to me that most people who look at it dispassionately see that merely getting a new company to do basically the same thing is not going to change all that much.
NB The select committee heard from several witnesses - they didn't just form a view based on their own analysis.
-- Dr Greg Wood ( talk) 12:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I've 'streamlined' the whole article; I think it's tidier now and reads better.
-- Dr Greg Wood ( talk) 17:21, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
The article's quite long now, so I'm giving it a trim today.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mark Harper. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mark Harper. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Updated to 2019 election, and have given figures to two significant figures - but I imagine there is policy somewhere, so if in the light of policy any editor wishes to add more accuracy (at the cost of clarity of course, but there you go) then feel free :) Friendly regards to all, Springnuts ( talk) 15:51, 12 April 2022 (UTC)