This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Stuart Hall (presenter) 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 article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I deleted a comment:
There is no evidence or citation of Hall ever being on Granada Reports so this has been removed. There is no mention of it on any biographical material relating to him. Paul210 06:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I've listened to Stuart Hall on 5 Live for many years and was unaware of his supposed affiliation with Manchester City. I have had an inkling of some affection, but nothing more. I think a citation is needed. Guv2006 ( talk) 16:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Hall has referred to a time when he played football at Crystal Palace and he turned down 20 quid a week and left to earn better money elsewhere. Are there any refs for this? It would add to the bio. Folks at 137 ( talk) 13:53, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
The BBC has reported Hall has been arrested and questioned over rape allegations http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20605267 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.148.123 ( talk) 16:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Can we please not jump the gun on categories etc? I am well aware that he should be labelled for what he is, but we are not and should not be a rolling news service and I think that in some cases there are legal procedures to be completed before he can be categorized as A/B/etc. I am really not clear why we should be in a hurry here. Best wishes to all DBaK ( talk) 10:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
This is a clear-cut case of child sexual abuse. Of course pleading guilty to an offence means you are convicted of it, can you produce a source which suggests otherwise? PatGallacher ( talk) 23:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I note that people do not have any hang-ups about updating relevant articles within minutes of the announcement of the result of the South Shields by-election, 2013. PatGallacher ( talk) 23:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I RV'd Ian on this but am not wedded to it and would rather discuss. Surely the article should have something in the lead about today's news? He is now notable for that as well as his former fame, and it seems odd that it is not accessible in the lead paragraph: indeed I fear that it will lead to more vandalism once the protection is off. How does it not meet WP:LEAD? Surely there is something notable, that should be mentioned, in this? Someone please educate me. Thanks and best wishes DBaK ( talk) 10:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Apparently two of the offences are "indecent penetration". Not an offence I've heard of under English law. Would this, baldly described, be "rape"? Tonywalton Talk 00:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
The third paragraph under "Prosecution and conviction" has a sentence reading: "The prosecutor argued that the issues concerned were serious enough that Hall should stand trial at Crown Court, to which the defence did not object."
The inclusion of this sentence suggests that it's noteworthy that the trial was committed to Crown Court, when commitals for sexual offences are pretty standard practice. It would have been more noteworthy if it had stayed at the Magistrates', not least because magistrates' sentencing powers are very limited, e.g. they can give a maximum of 6 months in prison. Should the sentence be removed to avoid confusion?
I would be bold and do it myself, but I'm new to Wikipedia and just finding my feet. Thoughts? 81.145.162.95 ( talk) 13:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I've attempted to give a better balance to the lead by (1) re-adding the BBC profile quote, which gives some necessary context as to why he was perceived by the public as something more than the average BBC newscaster; and (2) removing unnecessary details about the dates and process leading to his convictions, which are covered in detail in the main text. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 08:39, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
His OBE was annulled here - "THE QUEEN has directed that the appointment of James Stuart HALL to be an Officer of the Civil Division of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, dated 31 December 2011, shall be cancelled and annulled and that his name shall be erased from the Register of the said Order" - and should not be reinstated in the lead or infobox. An IP keeps trying to reinstate it and has been warned for edit warring. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 10:21, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Stuart Hall (presenter). 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) 15:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Right now it's written in the article and in the source that Yasmin Alibhai-Brown got a letter in May of 2012 and that the letter was motivated by the Savile scandal. But the Savile scandal started in September of 2012. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is wrong and it is not correct what is written in this WP article. It is also strange that Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has quoted the writer of the letter about the furore over Jimmy Savile since the writer could not possibly have known about that furore months before it started. Calle Widmann ( talk) 19:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
He hasent been heard from publicaly since late 2016 which Is not really a long time but remember he was a somewaht frail 87 year old and he has got to be an even frailer 93 year old if he is even still alive. For a young person they would have long left (I Highly doubt Justin Lee Collins is dead) but and old man like Hall they only have a short time left on this earth no matter how healthy they are and alot can change in health within 6/7 years, No reason why he couldnt have died and it was left on the reporters cutting room floor. As a disgraced Celebrity with no family to support and Is not histpricaly important enoughe could have easily died in the interim which is maybe far-fetched but not impossible and It was never reported and who would care anyway he was a horrible predetor who's jolly perosna was a facade in a way he died in 2013 as soon as he was arrested. Its possqble his family had his death covered up and he can die and be buried in modest funaral away from those who would hinder them and the News people would sigh in relife as they dont need to deliver an awkward subject and saves BAFA from the difficult task of wheather or not he should be in the in Memoriam segment. Long story short no real evedence of being alive and when any evedence comes to light that he is still then ignore this however till then could it be feesable to move him to "Possibly Living people" Perosnanly I think its cowardly to ignore him if he died but its adifficult choice that the news media havent really had the chance to deal with atleast Savile they the younger reporters atleast who didnt know aboutSaviles crimes could rest on ignorance but Halls crimes went to light and seeing as he moved out and rented a modest house and has taken to modest life its possible he simply faded away as a commoner and was given a commeners send-off 2A00:23C5:FE06:F201:A07F:D997:E111:1E7F ( talk) 21:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
According to the guidance at "Category:Possibly living people" people aged over 90 who have had no mention in the last 10 years may be moved to this category. The last mention of him is in 2016, so he still has a few years to go. He was a fairly high profile case, so it's unlikely that his death would have gone completely unnoticed. PatGallacher ( talk) 21:28, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Stuart Hall (presenter) 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 article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I deleted a comment:
There is no evidence or citation of Hall ever being on Granada Reports so this has been removed. There is no mention of it on any biographical material relating to him. Paul210 06:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I've listened to Stuart Hall on 5 Live for many years and was unaware of his supposed affiliation with Manchester City. I have had an inkling of some affection, but nothing more. I think a citation is needed. Guv2006 ( talk) 16:03, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Hall has referred to a time when he played football at Crystal Palace and he turned down 20 quid a week and left to earn better money elsewhere. Are there any refs for this? It would add to the bio. Folks at 137 ( talk) 13:53, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
The BBC has reported Hall has been arrested and questioned over rape allegations http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20605267 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.148.123 ( talk) 16:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Can we please not jump the gun on categories etc? I am well aware that he should be labelled for what he is, but we are not and should not be a rolling news service and I think that in some cases there are legal procedures to be completed before he can be categorized as A/B/etc. I am really not clear why we should be in a hurry here. Best wishes to all DBaK ( talk) 10:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
This is a clear-cut case of child sexual abuse. Of course pleading guilty to an offence means you are convicted of it, can you produce a source which suggests otherwise? PatGallacher ( talk) 23:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I note that people do not have any hang-ups about updating relevant articles within minutes of the announcement of the result of the South Shields by-election, 2013. PatGallacher ( talk) 23:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I RV'd Ian on this but am not wedded to it and would rather discuss. Surely the article should have something in the lead about today's news? He is now notable for that as well as his former fame, and it seems odd that it is not accessible in the lead paragraph: indeed I fear that it will lead to more vandalism once the protection is off. How does it not meet WP:LEAD? Surely there is something notable, that should be mentioned, in this? Someone please educate me. Thanks and best wishes DBaK ( talk) 10:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Apparently two of the offences are "indecent penetration". Not an offence I've heard of under English law. Would this, baldly described, be "rape"? Tonywalton Talk 00:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
The third paragraph under "Prosecution and conviction" has a sentence reading: "The prosecutor argued that the issues concerned were serious enough that Hall should stand trial at Crown Court, to which the defence did not object."
The inclusion of this sentence suggests that it's noteworthy that the trial was committed to Crown Court, when commitals for sexual offences are pretty standard practice. It would have been more noteworthy if it had stayed at the Magistrates', not least because magistrates' sentencing powers are very limited, e.g. they can give a maximum of 6 months in prison. Should the sentence be removed to avoid confusion?
I would be bold and do it myself, but I'm new to Wikipedia and just finding my feet. Thoughts? 81.145.162.95 ( talk) 13:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
I've attempted to give a better balance to the lead by (1) re-adding the BBC profile quote, which gives some necessary context as to why he was perceived by the public as something more than the average BBC newscaster; and (2) removing unnecessary details about the dates and process leading to his convictions, which are covered in detail in the main text. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 08:39, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
His OBE was annulled here - "THE QUEEN has directed that the appointment of James Stuart HALL to be an Officer of the Civil Division of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire, dated 31 December 2011, shall be cancelled and annulled and that his name shall be erased from the Register of the said Order" - and should not be reinstated in the lead or infobox. An IP keeps trying to reinstate it and has been warned for edit warring. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 10:21, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Stuart Hall (presenter). 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) 15:26, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Right now it's written in the article and in the source that Yasmin Alibhai-Brown got a letter in May of 2012 and that the letter was motivated by the Savile scandal. But the Savile scandal started in September of 2012. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown is wrong and it is not correct what is written in this WP article. It is also strange that Yasmin Alibhai-Brown has quoted the writer of the letter about the furore over Jimmy Savile since the writer could not possibly have known about that furore months before it started. Calle Widmann ( talk) 19:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
He hasent been heard from publicaly since late 2016 which Is not really a long time but remember he was a somewaht frail 87 year old and he has got to be an even frailer 93 year old if he is even still alive. For a young person they would have long left (I Highly doubt Justin Lee Collins is dead) but and old man like Hall they only have a short time left on this earth no matter how healthy they are and alot can change in health within 6/7 years, No reason why he couldnt have died and it was left on the reporters cutting room floor. As a disgraced Celebrity with no family to support and Is not histpricaly important enoughe could have easily died in the interim which is maybe far-fetched but not impossible and It was never reported and who would care anyway he was a horrible predetor who's jolly perosna was a facade in a way he died in 2013 as soon as he was arrested. Its possqble his family had his death covered up and he can die and be buried in modest funaral away from those who would hinder them and the News people would sigh in relife as they dont need to deliver an awkward subject and saves BAFA from the difficult task of wheather or not he should be in the in Memoriam segment. Long story short no real evedence of being alive and when any evedence comes to light that he is still then ignore this however till then could it be feesable to move him to "Possibly Living people" Perosnanly I think its cowardly to ignore him if he died but its adifficult choice that the news media havent really had the chance to deal with atleast Savile they the younger reporters atleast who didnt know aboutSaviles crimes could rest on ignorance but Halls crimes went to light and seeing as he moved out and rented a modest house and has taken to modest life its possible he simply faded away as a commoner and was given a commeners send-off 2A00:23C5:FE06:F201:A07F:D997:E111:1E7F ( talk) 21:14, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
According to the guidance at "Category:Possibly living people" people aged over 90 who have had no mention in the last 10 years may be moved to this category. The last mention of him is in 2016, so he still has a few years to go. He was a fairly high profile case, so it's unlikely that his death would have gone completely unnoticed. PatGallacher ( talk) 21:28, 3 February 2023 (UTC)