Talk:Shane Jones
| 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: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.JPG)
Untitled
editWhat is the deal with the constant changes to this page...? Always goat related! Insaneassassin247 13:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Marital status
editAs Jones has left his wife and has a new partner how should this be presented in the infobox? This edit replaced the name of his spouse and removed the reference to his children. But he is apparently still married and of course still has the children! Is it correct to change "spouse" to "partner""; add "ex-wife" to the infobox and note that the children are by his ex-wife not partner? DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 09:35, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- According to the Manual of Style, "the purpose of an infobox [is] to summarize key facts in the article in which it appears." The article does not discuss his later private life. If it is important to talk about ex wifes and new partners, this would have to be added to the article itself. Once it's there, we can decide whether those details are "key facts" that should be included in the infobox. Not that I'm consistent about this myself, but I would suggest that few spouses of politicians should be included in infoboxes. Schwede66 17:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Shane Jones and tobacco industry
edit@Gadfium I shouldn't have discussed via edit summary although I stand by removing factually inaccurate content from a BLP. The paragraph aside from being incorrect focused more on his history/controversy rather than his view. It's more appropriate for the section on his term in government but honestly political BLPs become a mess of individual primary sourced news releases and I'm not too interested in making it flow into the article nicely. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- No problem, your edit summary indicated what you were objecting to. The Cabinet Manual isn't really the issue, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is. I've reworded it.-Gadfium (talk) 04:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC)