| 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Concerns with page quality edit
This should be a straightforward political biography, however, since Bashir's defection it's turned into a forum where all and sundry can sling mud at him.
All sorts of allegations, from membership with other parties to accusations of serious crime are passed off as "information", however, when one reads carefully through the alleged "sources", everything comes from political opponents or media outlets quoting a political opponent. Is this the Daily Mail or a reliable online encyclopaedia?
If the powers-that-be insist on libellous statements being included on his page, then I suggest that, at the very least, a separate section be created that makes it clear that we are dealing with allegations from political opponents.
Hercules Parrot (talk) 22:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments.
- I question the idea that this article should be a "straightforward political biography," although I'm not certain what you mean by that. An article like this should cover contentious issues about an individual, as well as the more "straightforward" ones. However, you are right that it must do so in an appropriate manner.
- Looking at the article, material is generally supported by citations to reliable sources. Where the claims are made by a political opponent, that is made clear. Counter-arguments and responses are given as well. I am not certain if the weight given to different elements is 100% correct and it would be nice to see some more recent follow-up of that latest allegations. If you know of any reliable source coverage of that, please do suggest them.
- I do not see anything that is libellous. If there were anything that was libellous, it should certainly be removed.
- It would be helpful if you could be more specific about which parts of the text concern you. Please quote exact lines. Bondegezou (talk) 23:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- I've made some changes to the article. His supposed association with Labour seemed ill-sourced, so I removed that. I updated another sentence. The final paragraph feels to me overly weighted towards UKIP's claims rather than Bashir's denials, but I wasn't certain how best to change that. I note none of the allegations seem to have gone anywhere, but I couldn't find any reliable source coverage saying that. Bondegezou (talk) 00:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Conservative? edit
There are references to Bashir discussing "re-joining his old party", but no claim that he was ever a member of the Conservatives.Royalcourtier (talk) 00:36, 6 April 2015 (UTC)