This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Robert Jenrick 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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Robert Jenrick had no previous connection with Newark.
I cannot envisage that this sentence is added to the tonnes of MPs who serve constituencies where they have no connection. Seems like this was added for political reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.5.114.248 ( talk) 08:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
There's something at the beginning of the article about travelling to a second home.
By the time you get to the second paragraph under 'Coronavirus', you've probably forgotten about this journey, and the paragraph doesn't make much sense without a reminder of this. Mdrb55 ( talk) 22:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Jenrick made some comments on immigration that were deemed controversial by some: "Excessive uncontrolled migration threatens to cannibalise the compassion that marks out the British people... And those crossing tend to have completely different lifestyles and values to those in the UK and tend to settle in already hyper-diverse areas" It was criticised by the Refugee Council and Lib Dems. The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants called it "dog-whistling to the far-right". I've not seen a great deal of coverage on it, but would this merit inclusion under his Ministerial Career section or would it be undue weight Michaeldble ( talk) 14:51, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Recently edited to show accusations based on a news story. Opinion of a person is irrelevant in Wikipedia, a page should show fact 2.223.204.171 ( talk) 06:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Has he gone, or is it just Westminster chit-chat? Tim O'Doherty ( talk) 18:44, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
RE: 'This section may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (July 2023)'.
I doubt I am 'a particular audience' and wasn't looking for some of this information, but I enjoyed it. It's very thorough, and I wish some other articles were so informative. I'd be sad to see it go. Montezuma69 ( talk) 05:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Robert Jenrick 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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Robert Jenrick had no previous connection with Newark.
I cannot envisage that this sentence is added to the tonnes of MPs who serve constituencies where they have no connection. Seems like this was added for political reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.5.114.248 ( talk) 08:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
There's something at the beginning of the article about travelling to a second home.
By the time you get to the second paragraph under 'Coronavirus', you've probably forgotten about this journey, and the paragraph doesn't make much sense without a reminder of this. Mdrb55 ( talk) 22:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Jenrick made some comments on immigration that were deemed controversial by some: "Excessive uncontrolled migration threatens to cannibalise the compassion that marks out the British people... And those crossing tend to have completely different lifestyles and values to those in the UK and tend to settle in already hyper-diverse areas" It was criticised by the Refugee Council and Lib Dems. The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants called it "dog-whistling to the far-right". I've not seen a great deal of coverage on it, but would this merit inclusion under his Ministerial Career section or would it be undue weight Michaeldble ( talk) 14:51, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Recently edited to show accusations based on a news story. Opinion of a person is irrelevant in Wikipedia, a page should show fact 2.223.204.171 ( talk) 06:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Has he gone, or is it just Westminster chit-chat? Tim O'Doherty ( talk) 18:44, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
RE: 'This section may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (July 2023)'.
I doubt I am 'a particular audience' and wasn't looking for some of this information, but I enjoyed it. It's very thorough, and I wish some other articles were so informative. I'd be sad to see it go. Montezuma69 ( talk) 05:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)