Talk:Neale Hanvey

Parliamentary status

According to Parliament he is an independent, not SNP, SNP (suspended) or anything similar. Should that change in the future, the article can easily be updated. FDW777 (talk) 22:43, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Slow motion edit war

There has been a slow motion edit war betweeen @Polyssotsky: and @VUOP: regarding whether he should be described as Scottish or British. Polyssotsky is claiming "use version changed on 10/1" and that discussion is required to change that. I say the history of this article shows otherwise.

The first time any descriptor was added to the article was on 08:58, 13 December 2019 when VUOP added "Scottish". This remained stable until 12:17, 30 December 2019 when an IP changed "Scottish" to "British". This was reverted by another IP on 08:00, 4 January 2020, which was reverted without explanation 13 minutes later. It was changed back to Scottish on 01:30, 10 January 2020. So it is clear from that history that the article started out as Scottish, and if any change was not discussed it was the change to "British" made on 30 December and it is that change that needs consensus.

Since 10 January the following changes have been made.

• 12:28, 3 March 2020 Scottish to British stating "use version changed on 10/1"
• 12:10, 4 March 2020 British to Scottish
• 10:50, 6 March 2020 Scottish to British
• 13:54, 4 April 2020 British to Scottish
• 18:01, 11 April 2020 Scottish to British stating "Revert: discussion needed for this"
• 18:45, 14 April 2020 British to Scottish
• 16:45, 17 April 2020 Scottish to British stating "revert leave as it was"
• 04:24, 20 May 2020 British to Scottish
• 13:45, 20 May 2020 Scottish to British
• 13:46, 20 May 2020 British to Scottish stating "Scottish is more specific"
• 14:16, 22 May 2020 Scottish to British stating "use talk to change"

I suppose the most generous interpretation is that neither Scottish nor British has ever been stable for any period of time. The stable version prior to 10/1 is a myth, as the history prior to that demonstrates. The article started out without a descriptor, Scottish was added, nobody objected, it remained in the article until an IP changed it without explanation or discussion on 30 December. If any edit needs to be discussed here, it's that one. I am restoring the initial descriptor of Scottish. FDW777 (talk) 19:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your attention here. I appreciate that there might be no cause for a dispute here. My intervention is based on the fact that (other than one instance) each of the reversions from British to Scottish has had no edit summary so I have added a discussion note to my edits. After considering for a while what issues are involved I would say that Hanvey was previously a Scottish politician as he was purely involved in the regional not national political scene. He is now a member of the national parliament and therefore it would be less logical to describe him as Scottish and more as British (participating on a national stage.) I understand from other discussions that WP has no distinct policy here for UK due to overlapping identities that don't appear to apply to other sovereign states. Yet he is a "British politician" now.--Polyssotsky (talk) 12:28, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I think describing him as "British" is more accurate.80.2.22.125(80.2.22.125) 13:32, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Given that the discussion is purely about using "British", I shall go ahead and edit the article.--Polyssotsky (talk) 14:31, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

The slow-motion edit war continues. I don't exactly want to take part in that, but as the user making the changes may not know how to refer to the talk pages, I thought I'd add a contrasting view. Hanvey was a regional politician (he was a councillor in the region of Fife) but he has become a national politician in that he's a participant on the national stages of the UK and Scotland. The UK's constitutional structure — Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England are all considered countries within the country of the UK by its governments — and the UK's overlapping identities makes this all a bit of a mess. Rather than edit back and forth between Scottish and British, I'm going to copy what has been done to the pages of other Scottish National Party MPs and introduce Hanvey as simply a "Scottish National Party (SNP) politician'. This is what's been done with Chris Law, Alison Thewliss, Philippa Whitford and Pete Wishart. I don't know if that's the best thing to do, but it might give us peace. HulloHulot (talk) 15:354, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Original research and cherry picking removed again

pinksaltire.com is not a reliable reference. The majority of the "Views" section consists of tweets of Hanvey that have not been covered in secondary references. Does every tweet he's ever made merit commentary here? This doesn't mention Neale Hanvey, nor does this, nor this. You cannot construct paragraphs that are pure synthesis using references that don't mention Neale Hanvey. FDW777 (talk) 16:44, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

I have left the Women's Pledge tweet in since that view was covered by The Times, unlike the other tweets which no reliable references are talking about. FDW777 (talk) 17:06, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I agree the section on Hanvey's views can be improved. Seeing how the article had been amended, I had intended to return the page to a version that has been long-standing and until now uncontroversial, with live links for the citations, before moving on to updating the content. I tend to edit towards preservation. As a result of your sanction, I thought I'd review my thinking before responding to you. I can sometimes forget good faith on these pages and didn't want to be cranky. Hanvey's comments on Murray's sentencing have been reported in the national media, this is one example, as have his early day motions calling for Murray's release and [letters https://www.thenational.scot/news/19749353.alex-salmond-says-jailing-craig-murray-shamed-scotland/] to the Scottish Justice Secretary. I would be interested in how you would balance the context necessary to Hanvey's work on this front with the expected standard for a BLP. I do not have the patience to cite the 8,536 tweets that remain on Hanvey's twitter page, nor the inclination, but was leaning towards retaining _some_ of his tweets on GRA reform because they explain his views. I read the Pink Saltire's cite as acceptable under the BLP given the author's credentials, the control the org has over its publication, how the citation was framed and that the citation supported the subject's quote. I think that is a more cautious approach than the one someone else used with FairCop, which I meant to look for advice on. Similarly, I was going to fix some of the article's other quirks, like the weird tense usage around his parents. I hope that helps clarify my thinking and how I intended to move forward. HulloHulot (talk) 18:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

The issue isn't preservation or not, simply that what appeared in the article was not properly referenced. I haven't even looked at Neale Hanvey's twitter feed, but I'd imagine like everyone else he tweets about a wide variety of subjects. Therefore it's no use having a selection of tweets chosen by editors as being reflective of his views. Regarding Murray I don't regard that as significant coverage of Hanvey's tweet, it's just the typical rent-a-quote that appears in most news stories these days. FDW777 (talk) 18:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

The point was not the entirety of his views, but that they reflected his views on that subject: his columns and speeches in the Commons might be a better sources to site. Just as the point about Murray is that Hanvey is a prominent campaigner for his release and his commentary and campaigning has received press attention. I think the political career section is a more natural fit, and I'm sure you'll be able to advise on how to contextualise information about Murray. We do both want to improve the page and both of us, looking up the talk page, have been working towards that end for some time. I would also be interested in your thinking about the continuing inclusion of the fair cop citation — does it meet your standards? HulloHulot (talk) 12:16, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Fair Cop does not, thank you for pointing it out (again). As the case didn't directly involve Neale Hanvey, whether it actually went to court or not would appear to be tangential to him, so I have removed the claim. I'm glad we agree we're both trying to improve the article. Any removals I make aren't permanent, I am happy for content to be restored if it can be properly referenced. But as above, I believe we should be trying to cover his views that have been the subject of secondary references. Most news articles these days include a social medial comment from some prominent person or persons, like the Murray one mentioned. FDW777 (talk) 12:30, 23 February 2022 (UTC)