Talk:Ben Bradley (politician)

Education

I have trimmed down the content of him being educated at Derby Grammar School, sourced from Facebook. I don't think Facebook is an acceptable source, as we don't know whether this is actually him. I have trimmed the content down to what the profile actually says, which is that he went to Derby Grammar School, nothing more. This is a compromise wording while we discuss on the talk page. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I have also removed the reference to him obtaining a first class degree, as the reference cited (Nottingham Post) does not state anything about his degree classification, only that he obtained a degree. Please do not reinstate without having a reliable source backing it up. --TuringBox (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Bellowhead678 (Absolutelypuremilk) - I just wanted to leave a note to confirm someone is actually reading the Talk content (TuringBox is occasional).

Facebook is just one of the areas where WP is well behind the times (another is internal wikilinking, once per article, but that's another story); considering {{Facebook}}, looking specifically at the initial 2009 upload, the guidance is essentially the same as present, in that it is only intended as an Ext link, and by extension may not be used elsewhere as a ref. Many organisations have strayed away from domain names, replaced by Facebook and similar, and I don't see any obvious reason to exclude an official FB presence when cite Twitter and cite AV media are accepted, ferinstance. Template talk:Facebook#Cite Facebook suggests this in March 2024. Primefac locked it up in 2018, and, without further research, the only template editor I can recall is Pigsonthewing, but this to me seems a logical way to go, by creating a new ref facility.

I don't know if it's ever been discussed, as I don't have the time (during English summertime) to delve into theoretical past stuff that likely would've had no changing consequences. The template-author, User:Wikien2009, is lapsed since 2012. Thanks.--82.13.47.210 (talk) 10:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

{{facebook}} is not a citation template. You would need to have a discussion (not on a random article's talk page) about creating a new template, {{cite facebook}} or similar. Primefac (talk) 11:08, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, thx for your swift reaction, that's why I pinged Andy Mabbett who would be more conversant with administrative protocols (and maybe wrote guidance for cite twitter, IIRC?).-- 82.13.47.210 (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of sub-heading Ben Bradley (politician)#Brexit and contents including references

I have restored the section named above, deleted in entirety by This is Paul in this change with the edit summary "find a better source please".

It is bad form to delete an entire headed section and references - IMO this is breaching WP:NPOV in that the piece referred to was written by Bradley at an established site and was carried by the European political correspondent of the Daily Express newspaper. If an IP deletes headed content it would be flagged and regarded as vandalism. Bradley commented on his electorate's Brexit voting as "72% to Leave the EU", and again to deny this to Wikipedia readers is breaching NPOV.

The sub heading prose was originally added by an IP address and I cited it in this change with the edit summary "Expand the IPs one-liner exclamation, citing the original article that pre-dated the newspaper coverage, leaving the newspaper ref in case of Link rot".

I hope not to see any further deletion of this supported prose, and if dissatisfied I have invited User:This is Paul to refer the sequence to reliable sources noticeboard for their comments.-Semperito (talk) 13:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but sources such as the Daily Express and Brexit Central are just not encyclopedic, so if nobody else has done so already, I'm going to revert you again. If you believe so strongly that this should be included then find a reliable source to support the statement. This is Paul (talk) 16:52, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Your complete knee jerk rollback of all my recent edits appear to be censorship and breaching WP:NPOV, that's why I started this discussion, so that non-involved can quickly observe. You decide where you want to continue - I suspect AN/I will assert that it is a content dispute, but it appears to me as editor behaviour and WP:BIAS.-Semperito (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

If you correctly source these statements then there isn't a problem. If you throw your toys out of the pram and start screaming about censorship, Knee jerk reactions, the metropolitan liberal elite, and so on, then there is a problem. The onus is on you to provide reliable sources if you want this information to be included. The article is a biography of a living person, and because of that, the links you provided are not regarded as reliable sources. If you want to take this to ANI then be my guest, but they will probably say much the same as I have. This is Paul (talk) 18:16, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Now referred to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Edit-warring, deletion of headed content and references, censorship of wikipedia, WP:NPOV.-Semperito (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 23 August 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (page mover nac) The editor whose username is Z0 08:49, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

---

Ben Bradley (politician) → Ben Bradley – Only other "Ben Bradley" (rather than "Benjamin") is the Hollyoaks character, who has no article. Unreal7 (talk) 14:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:32, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

• Leaning Oppose partly because Ben Bradlee gets far more traffic (900 pd vs less than 200). There would need to be hatnotes for him and the Brookside character. Johnbod (talk) 17:00, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose, even though it's a sound alike and not a direct spelling, Ben Bradlee seems to be primary. So leaving the situation as is, with the link going to a disamg page, makes the most sense in terms of a common and reasonable misspelling. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:11, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Primary for Bradlee but not for Bradley. Peter James (talk) 16:08, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support as they are different names. A hatnote could just link to the Benjamin Bradley disambiguation page. Peter James (talk) 16:08, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose there might be a case that Ben Bradley should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Ben Bradlee. — bieχχ (talk) 20:58, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose because of Ben Bradlee. As the situation currently stands Ben Bradley should be a disambiguation page. We could review the situation again if Bradley becomes more prominent, i.e., should he be appointed as a senior minister. This is Paul (talk) 21:57, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose because the primary topic for "Ben Bradley" is Ben Bradlee and so Ben Bradley should WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Ben Bradlee. --В²C ☎ 22:27, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

No, that's going much too far! Johnbod (talk) 01:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.