Talk:Matthew Gordon-Banks

1357:

assertions as the years go on and people continue to avail themselves of the EU's new bizarre policy for burying even factually correct reports from search engines. We're probably going to have to develop some policies of our own, specifically for helping users outside the EU understand what is going on with this disappearing content and to help clarify that the underlying sources can be perfectly reliable (that is, they were accurate, factual reporting) but removed nonetheless. As Icewhiz points out, if the actual source were removed from the UK paper's website as a result of libel, that would be an entirely different story; in that case, BLP would apply and we'd probably avoid referencing this story. But we have no reason to assume that now, and the EU's new doctrine allows for some links to be removed, even if the story they point to was non-libelous and perfectly factual, but simply "no longer relevant" (again, as determined by Google which has a vested interest in not looking too closely at the details and thus saving itself legal expenses). Which is exactly why the doctrine is starting to face public furor in the EU; it was not meant to help politicians or criminals to whitewash their personal history, but in upwards of 5% of the requests that Google gets, that's exactly what's happening. Anyway, although the issue is nuanced, I have faith that the en.Knowledge community will continue to parse the legal fictions correctly and not sanitize pages supported by perfectly reliable sources. There's going to be some headaches though, mark my words.

1479:

seems to be less about whether the arrest occurred and more about its relevance, and it seems as if there are relatively few RS about Banks as a subject out there at all (and certainly a very small number used in the article), so this is not exactly out-of-proportion representation of what the sources say about the man. I would say that the event is certainly noteworthy and relevant, given the main causes of notability for the subject, so the question comes down to whether or not a single article can constitute "well documented". I'd say that's a matter that needs to be judged by context, on a case-by-case basis, including such considerations as: the total amount of coverage on the topic, the nature of the claim itself, the question of whether the claim is contradicted by any other sources, and the depth of coverage of the claim in the reliable source in question (that is to say, is the claim an offhand mention in the source, or the main thrust of the piece, backed by detail and context?), and the general standing of the publication from which the source is derived. On the balance of these factors and the other information we are party to here, one source feels sufficient to me, in this instance.

1621:

was meant to be applied only to very old events relating to non-public figures. And while many observers both within the legal world and without questioned how that was ever going to work and if this doctrine made any kind of sense at all (especially when Google is put in the uncomfortable position of being both judge of the importance of the information and potential defendant in very costly legal action if the subject that the info relates to is unhappy with their decision), this has got to be one of the more extreme cases of the kind of overreach that critics of the doctrine said were likely: a politician has managed to get links removed with regard to a story about his own arrest, which took place mere months ago. The truth is, we now don't know if there

234: 213: 2484:

defamatory and untrue. In the last 14 days I have been subjected to huge pressure under social media. My Wiki page has been filleted of most of the useful information outsiders might require. Phillip Cross and Moist Towlett who have been banned have alter the balance in favor of bad news rather than my career. This latest example Wiki editors have fast blocked is clearly untrue but as he is blocked I cannot msee the exact allegation - which I expect is something sexual. It is tiresome that Not a Single Peice of evidence has ever been produced. Thank you for blocking these rogue editors. MGB

2187:

Professional Standards of Perjury by two police officers last year, which is easily proven, two cases of gross misconduct where I was forcibly removed against medical advice from my sick bed at home, the alteration to cover the police of my NHS medical records by an NHS nurse, and the defamatory untrue statements of a male nurse from Mountain Health contracted to the TV Police. I am not seeking the sacking of any police officers and certainly not having them jailed for Perjury but I am trying to highlight in the press the above to balance what people write.

2052:

of the content you created, you should understand that this is a collaborative project based on content and verification guidelines which may be hard to understand at first, but which were not settled upon arbitrarily, but rather with a great deal of community discussion. This means that you cannot get too attached to content which you write, especially as a novice, and especially relating to subjects/persons you directly know, because there are good chances that what you write could be changed or removed if they do not satisfy our content

1219:

expunging in the UK/EU, and expects us to just honour as if we were an extension of those entities--which of course we aren't. But I don't think we should be pontificating too far into what may be going on here; I'm sure you'll agree that until we have good reason (that is, a solid source) indicating a successful libel suit, we need to continue to utilize our sources as we otherwise would. As you pointed out earlier, all we have at present is an IP claiming to be the subject, whose comments here do not constitute a source.

1626:

editors will have less access to than other contributors, or which get removed from European sites altogether, but which were perfectly factual and accurate and still constitute reliable sources for our purposes. Do we save copies of these sources? That seems highly problematic, in multiple ways--not the least of which is that we would never now which ones are going to need to be preserved until they start to disappear. This is very disconcerting; I can only imagine how those living in the EU right now feel about it.

1114:(or any search engine) acts as a proxy for the EU in an administrative capacity (no court is involved unless Google decides to press the issue and foot a legal bill) and it is liable for sizable damages if it is found to have refused to remove information it "should" have, under the EU's high court doctrines on the matter. This means that Google often just chooses the path of least resistance and gives in to these requests. Whatever the case, it seems that Google did in fact remove the links here. 2283:'s involvement in the SIS...). I quote you saying "there has been vandalism in the last 14 days including absured allegations of sexual matter with young men" however I am yet to find any such material to be posted on the article for Matthew Gordon-banks in any of the edit history, why would you make this up (particularly such a serious matter that concerns yourself?), it seems comical. You can trawl the edits yourself. Perhaps one might say you have something to add regarding this matter? 2464:(Removed a long time ago by someone) In the early stages of this biography it should be added by any experienced Editor that Banks made "the only Conservative gain in England" (in the 1992 election - which was a spectacular local win against the trend of Conservatives losing a huge number of seats. Proof can be found with an easy Google of BBC election results to quote BBC. (The Conservatives also one one seat in Scotland, Aberdeen South and one in Wales, Brecon and Radnor) 2445:

Environment to Minister's of State, David Curry and Robert Jones". 1. source can remain item 4 2. Strongly suggest placing in "Dept of Environment" as most readers will not know whom Curry and Jones (now dead) were, or which Department they/he served in. Gordon Banks's responsibilities were "Local Government, Housing and Planning" (also covered in the item 4 press release used as evidence which came from the Local Government Association) I hope this is helpful. MGB

1146:. Google and the UK courts may have decided that the appropriate thing to do was to comply with his efforts to sanitize his history on the internet, but that's a separate legal matter between him and those entities. We are not going to make a decision about whether to cover this story based on the fact that he has had good fortune in his efforts in the EU. We will make that determination based on our own internal policies on verifiability and 181: 306: 1747:(reference #2), with no indication on whether the source was online or if the source was the published book. If it was the online source, then it should be tagged as subscription required, and an URL to the web page. If it was the book, then there should be a proper cite which includes the volume, name of the publisher, edition, year of publication, chapter or page number(s) and an ISBN. Their website says - 490:"This month he has done the ultimate. When the Daily Express has obeyed a Court Order to remove from the internet a false article sensationalised concerning an alleged drink drive charge he has managed to use a "device" put into archive on Court Order (Oxford Crown Court) to remove details he quotes simply because it no longer appears on a Google search." - A guilty court verdict does not count as a case of ' 507:). The Archives are there to ensure material persists if it gets removed (due to legal or journalistic pressure), or if the server host can no longer keep the website active (as is the case with alot of local newspapers who are facing increasing financial pressure and as a result are forced to close down at an ever increasing rate). I believe they are essential to making the wikipedia project a fair place. 119: 95: 64: 503:"The Daily Express have removed their article which was copied and I now have to wait for a Court date in 2018 to have this item removed even though it cannot be found on the internet but normal search." - The article was one of the first results to pop up in an internet search. As for the archives or "device"(haha), they are standard wikipedia procedure for citing references (please see 1571:

that you have the right policy interpretation here; under current policies we need multiple sources to support this. Given the arrest occurred in 2017, it's possible additional such sources may manifest (not withstanding Mr. Banks' legal efforts to discourage them), but at the present time, it seems the only policy-consistent approach is to avoid coverage of this arrest.

2310:

teaching career. In my case it happens because some powerful people do not like my attempts to improve dialogue between London and Moscow. I was also accused of having links to Russian intelligence which is nonsense. I only meet diplomats. You will find the article I refer to if you google my name. My dates are correct and we are in contact with the 21 yr olds parents.

2226:

police officer - I have close protection officers - made a change which is genuine. Someone says I am frequently asked to appear on Russian TV. This is intended to further destroy my reputation and puts my life at risk. It appears I made a serious attempt to take my life in the early hours of Tuesday morning and Police visited my home to check on my welfare.

1050:

off on-wiki (IIRC - it was History of Israel instead of Jewish studies or something similar - and I fixed this after corroborating this matched claims elsewhere)). To claim the subject is making legal threats to suppress reporting you need something stronger than writing on a wiki talk page. I will note that the press is often keen to report such threats.

2355:

along the road 'so intoxicated he had to steady himself against a garden wall.' The Wall was in Mr Gordon-Banks's own garden! In truth he had never walk anywhere but that's another story. No newspaper reports incorrectly, no newspaper reports he was charged with "Failing to Stop" why do so many Editors keep "making it up"! 13:20, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

1323:

that post above, however--just a lot of whinging about how you were an "inappropriate" editor because (for some reason) he thinks that the fact that he had some success getting these details removed from the public record on certain sites, that it is inappropriate for you to change the link for the article to another site on which it is preserved.

1944:. I'm sorry that you feel this disadvantages you, but I'm afraid we can't deviate from those policies in the way you suggest simply because Mr. Gordon Banks "works in intelligence" and thus his greatest contributions are, you seem to be suggesting, unknown. We just can't allow challenged claims in without support from reliable sources. 2306:

of the names, including mine, whose Wiki pages he has altered. He is also liked to journalists and one in particular at The Times. One wonders whether you are in anyway connected with this group given your remarks about my truthful comments. Things like frivolous. People take photo's of my movements and my driver everywhere we go.

2125:

the biog, but will seek to draw to the attention of Editors material that might or should be included. This is intended to work WITH Wiki Editors. When the subject is access, it is usually because people are interested in what he says on International Relations. Thus it is a rather incomplete Biog. Here is our first suggestion:

2191:

from PTSD in my view takes a disproportionate amount of space. At the time I was seeking to draw attention to Tim Farron MP taking money for his Leadership bid from several donors, whom at that time, were under investigation for bribery by the SFO. The only reason they were not charged was because rolls Royce paid a £600m fine.

129: 2105:"We" are going to provide Knowledge GHQ with some email original paperwork as the manner Mr Gordon Banks has been treated is dreadful. Even the most simple truthful thing has been deleted and we have highlighted in the past two writers keen to defame him who miraculously no longer edit under their original names. 2444:

In the over-editing and vandalism on this biography an (any) experienced editor has not replaced wording in the Parliamentary Career Section which is probably the most important item removed. Please may I suggest wording be added along the following lines, please: "1996-7 PPS at the Department of the

2190:

I have long since promised not to attempt to alter what little there now is in my entry. All my work overseas for the Ministry of Defence has been removed - thus all that would be of interest to International Relations practitioners. The Alleged anti-Semite remark made when I was suffering very badly

2051:

and is not allowed). Because Moist Towelett used the rename process, all of his older edits/commons on this page have been preserved and remain attached to his account, and he cannot avoid scrutiny for his actions here, and he has done nothing wrong in changing his name. As to his being a "wrecker"

1620:

This whole affair, however, has made me realize how important it is going to be for this community to pay some attention to how we are going to approach BLP coverage in light of the complexities that result in our sourcing as a consequence of the EU's "right to be Forgotten" doctrine. That doctrine

1390:

In the meantime, I see no legal threat from the IP immediately above, but if they (or any IP/account) has done so in the past, let me know. It's probably too stale to act on if its in the archive, but it will be good for editors working here to know about it, if it has happened; if it happens again,

1117:

However, the Right to be Forgotten can only touch the links in search engines (for the most part). The story actually stays up on the internet and can be reached if you know the web address or you just happen to live outside the EU (as most en.Knowledge users and editors do). However, it seems from

2309:

The sexual remarks were placed on the internet on 25th October, and within a few days an ISP had put them on the Wiki page. I too am very surprised the history of that action has been removed but there is police involvement. I have not made that point up. It has also this week affected my daughter's

2182:

As to Public Life - I left Public life not in 2016 but when resigning as a Councillor in Cotswold District (where I was the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee) in November 2004; some 14 years ago. Being a Member of, any, political Party until 2016 does not in my view constitute being in

2157:

1. The Daily Express and Daily Mail copied and embellished an article from a young Oxford Mail reporter. When questioned and investigated they realised it was not true and removed the articles from the internet. 2. It is the Courts in Oxford that have summoned the young reporter to Court in October

2124:

I would like to thank those Editors who have recently edited the page Matthew Gordon Banks. Mr Gordon-Banks would like to apologise to Moist Towlett and will try, if the system will allow this IP to revove remarks in the Talk Section. This IP promises NOT to seek to change at any time the contect of

1958:

Lastly, can you provide more details/proof of your assertion that Moist Toilette is the same person as the one behind other accounts that have operated on this article in the past. With an assertion backed up with more concrete evidence, we can look into the matter. But simply making the assertion

1570:

the sentence stating the requirement for multiple sources (i.e. the part that actually directly supports the position you were advocating for). I therefore assumed that you were trying to make an analogical extension from the portion of the section you did quote. But all of that said, it does seem

1533:

I consider this to be an incident of a negative nature, and I also consider Banks to be a public figure. If, as you say, "the event is certainly noteworthy and relevant", then I would expect to see multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the incident, and I don't see, or at least so far no

422:

A young reporter is now in the dock. The Daily Express have removed their article which was copied and I now have to wait for a Court date in 2018 to have this item removed even though it cannot be found on the internet but normal search. His approach for several years has been to blacken my name no

2527:

1. The concensus is broken by JKAHarper. 2. He makes a hash of the changes and does not get the sex correct of an alleged victim, who turned out to be a fraudster in her insurance claim. 3. He places a heading of Expulsion from the Liberal Democrat Party - there cannot be any evidence for this as I

2354:

I am no longer amazed at the number of editors' interfering with this biog. Mr Gordon-Banks was NOT charged with "Failure to Stop" - several Editor's have simple not read the newspaper report carefully. He is a quote from source 10. "Mr Ryman told the court an officer found Gordon-Banks 'stumbling'

2305:

Your remarks about my comments regarding Philip Cross are most unfair. Mr Cross has edited Wiki accounts throughout the day most days for several years!! He has been banned from Editing on Knowledge (if that is not proof enough of my telling the truth I do not know what is) and Social media is full

2128:

This is in fact an alteration suggested. In the 2010 section regarding Oliver Letwin suggest delete "no charges were brought" and replace it with - directly from the Daily Telegraph Article quoted which is very accurate, (on 24th Dec 2011) "the CPS and Metropolitan Police issued a statement stating

1625:

additional reliable sources that have since been hidden from the public, as a consequence of the subject's rapid and apparently highly effective legal exercises. That's something that bears the community looking into, if only to figure out how we are going to approach reliable sources which our EU

1271:

It appears the subject of the article is interested in pursuing Legal Action against myself for libel. As he is unaware of my identity and of course my pseudonyms only follow empty links on google, I am immune. But it should be noted that the subject has made previous accusations of 'libel' against

1218:

No, it need not necessarily be libel; I believe there may be other conditions in the UK under which a person convicted of a crime can have reference to that crime removed from publications. And note that the IP does not indicate that the story is a lie, but rather just something he has had success

1129:

went down, one of our editors simply linked to this version of the article (this is allowed under our policies). It seems (again, from the above comments) that Mr. Banks is now pursuing legal action against the owners of the Wayback Machine, to get this redundant version of the article taken down.

1049:

by an IP editor claiming to the subject. Sourcing from the subject of the article is generally not a good idea, unless it is a factual correction of little controversy (e.g. on a different wiki - I corrected someone's degrees after e-mailing with them (to request a picture) - they were a little bit

418:

This month he has done the ultimate. When the Daily Express has obeyed a Court Order to remove from the internet a false article sensationalised concerning an alleged drink drive charge he has managed to use a "device" put into archive on Court Order (Oxford Crown Court) to remove details he quotes

2483:

I would like to thank Editors whom prevent a further and very nasty alteration to my Wiki bio on 1st June. Between June and 16 June, I have suffered frequent and nasty intrusions into my private life. I do not know whom the now blocked perpetrator was but I am certain what they had to add was both

2068:

a topic/person, then I suggest that you give up that effort--because if that is your sole objective, it is going to stand in the way of your understanding the rules that editors must operate under here and you will only come into conflict with other editors who are following those rules (generally

1478:

determinations in cases of BLPs, but no such metric is enshrined in any policy or guideline that I know of--and in practice, vast numbers of BLP details (including the type you reference, which the article subject would rather were not included) have been sourced to a single RS. The question here

1322:

against you or other editors; these are strictly proscribed by policies that are very strongly enforced--these can lead to a block even on a first occasion. The "a young lawyer is now in the dock" comment is borderline, but I didn't see anything that explicitly constitutes a threat against you in

1113:

to webpages (including journalistic sources) which publish unflattering details about him removed, if they are "no longer relevant". There are counterbalancing legal principles that could keep these links up in the case of journalistic works and public figures, but you must understand that Google

2225:

Recently serious vandalism occurred I believe by two Students. A recent change in the Personal section ought to be removed. It was put in by a non-editor and it has an odd address - not an ISP. Please would someone look at this and look carefully at the History section to see who has done what. A

1356:

Unfortunately, while misinformed and to some extent the kind of thing you might expect from a person trying to edit an article on themselves with little experience with Knowledge or wish to understand and work within its rules, I fear that we are going to be seeing more and more of these kinds of

1169:

I hope that helps alleviate confusion for incoming commenters. Reiterating my original point for MT in this response, though: no, we cannot mention that he has had this information removed via Google's Right to be Forgotten procedure: even if the IP is Banks, his comments here do not constitute a

2408:

Once again, Mr Gordon-Banks was NOT charged with Failure to Stop". Editors are not reading source 10 news item carefully enough. Here is the key phrase from a Prosecutor not using words carefully (deliberately) "Mr Ryman told the court an officer found Gordon-Banks 'stumbling' along the road 'so

1521:

In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all

2186:

Finally, whilst The Daily Mail Group and an Oxford paper wrote some things about my driving licence being revoked the articles are substantially inaccurate. This very week commencing 2nd July 2018, both newspapers refuse to cover the current complaints being dealt with by Thames Valley Police

2254:

For your information, Mr Gordon Banks, I have for your protection redacted your email address (in two places) from your post above, just as someone else has already done in the copy of the post you placed on the Teahouse page. You say it is not to be published, but placing it here (or on the

1118:

the above comments that Mr. Banks brought action against the actual newspaper as well, in UK domestic court, to get them to take down the story. This may have been successful (or the paper may have just given in), seeing as the story seems to no longer be carried on their website.

919:. Currently this is described at greater length and detail than his stint as a MP for 5 years. If it stays in - it should probably be pared down to whatever he was convicted for (e.g. convicted in XDATE for YOffense, sentences to ZSentence) - and maybe left at a sentence or two. 514:

Finally, if you feel that the 'MOD' work has been removed, please add it back to the article. I myself have made sure not to remove a single character that contributes to the article during my edits, with most of the edits only editing the structure to better meet wikipedia's

2519:

Although recently US Editors with no axe to grind have made better shape of MY biography, we now have an edit from JKAHARPER whose names is familiar as are 2-3 others who work for the UK State in besmirching the names of those who take alternative views to UK Govt policy.

959:. The drunk driving episode is currently discussed in minute detail - while other more significant aspects of his activities are barely covered. I would assume he did something as MP besides just sit on some committee, but perhaps I'm wrong. Same for other activities. 1196:

I will note that it may be possible to retrieve at least PRIMARY RS on the right to be forgotten request to google, in which case it might be possible to source this claim. Whether it should receive attention in the wiki article is another matter (and it might not).

1134:, it is uncertain whether any action in a UK court could have much impact on this version; the U.S. has some of the strongest protections in the world (constitutional protections, no less) for freedom of expression in general and freedom of the press in particular. 2259:

publishing it: anyone on the Internet can look at either of these pages, and a great many people do. I have had, and seek, no other involvement with the matters discussed above concerning Knowledge's article about you. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}

1150:, and Moist Toilette is in no way an "unsuitable" editor for following those policies. (In fact, he did exactly the right thing in restoring a stable version of a viable source currently in use in this article and then opening this up to community discussion). 1738:

I believe that former politicians still qualify as being public figures, he was a member of Parliament between 1992 and 1997, and he's been covered in reliable sources since that time. However, many of the BLP claims in this article are sourced to:

1473:

Thanks for the elaboration on your position. But you seem to be jumping to the conclusion that a BLP claim has to be verified by multiple sources. Maybe that's not an unreasonable standard for an individual editor to adopt in helping them make

2278:

I return to this page upon my name being mentioned not only here but on the RFPP and Teahouse. Perhaps, as per wikipedias rules you may want to consult the Dispute Resolution process (and quit these frivolous and flawed accusations regarding

2367:

One of the newspaper articles says that in that incident he failed to stop. One could reasonably infer that he was charged with failure to stop. However, the article does not say that he was charged with this. So you're right: it should

2409:

intoxicated he had to steady himself against a garden wall". Mr GB is disabled. He had actually walked nowhere. The garden wall was his own garden wall. So why do Editor's insist on adding this Failure to Stop unless it is vexatious?

2535:

These changes are done by State backed employees. I ask that the recent changes be undone and I consider it libellous on the part of JKAHarper to suggest I have anything to do with American editors I have never even heard

1137:

What Mr. Banks does not seem to fully appreciate, for the purposes of this project, is that it does not matter where the copy of the article resides, or even if a version remains up online at all; all that matters for our

2333:

Thanks for adding clarity. As this is a complex issue I think you should resolve this by going through the official Wiki dispute resolution process, they will allow you to reach a fair and timely consensus regarding your

1849:

I have in my possession proof of Mr Gordon Banks's revocation of driving licence for a period due to illness, his living fulltime where he was born at Gordon Castle pre and post 1997. This has been passed to Knowledge by

444:

If you believe a section of the article is biased or inaccurate, improve it if you can; don't delete salvageable text.For example, if an article appears biased, add balancing material or make the wording more neutral.

2230:

I ask you to reverse the changes made by people who are not proper editors. The block on my own ISP is unfair. I have tried to revert things - they even suggested these students I was a paedophile. It has been hell.

2531:

In Jan 2021 when matters come to Court it will be seen that my Insurance company wrote as long ago as 2017 that I could not have been the driver of the car in question for the detailed reasons my insurer sets out.

414:

Moist towelett has sought to destroy all the best details - successfully since 2015 and replace it with nothing of any interest to those who would google. This includes a lot of work undertaken by the British MoD.

2574: 195: 2523:

Mr Harper has added in what he regards as the same articles re drink driving when a consensus had been agreed - not as he alleges by sock-puppets or friends of mine - but by editors I believe based in the US.

2569: 788:

the detail of the drink driving, and I very respectfully disagree with Icewhiz that a legal infraction of this nature is not relevant to coverage of a politician, given this position is where his primary

2221:

Over a number of years two people Moist Toilet and Phillip Cross now banned from Editing have truly destroyed my entry and anyone in International Relations looking me up sees very little most negative.

2594: 2178:

Regarding the recent edits concerning "my" surname. May "I" make it clear my surname is Gordon Banks. This appears in my Passport. I was known simply as Matthew Banks as an MP which over20 years ago!

1064:

Unfortunately, that's not a reliable source for our purposes. But, just to clarify the legal, technical and pragmatic issues here for those who may live outside the EU and/or those unfamiliar with the

284: 274: 1899:

The dilution of every positive thing Mr Gordon Banks has done since 2015 is dreadful. He is too disabled now to cover the Middle East on foot hence his switch to Russia where he first visited in 1984.

2136: 1873: 1851: 981:

In this context, then yes. I think I agree that the weight is not evenly distributed. A pairing down of the event would be more suitable (possibly to 1/3 of its current size). Tack, for the edit.

2589: 2537: 2485: 2159: 250: 2378:

If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find

745:, so the suspension/twitter content should be included as it was widely reported, the drunk driving on the other hand was not widely reported and should be excluded - If you cannot find 190: 105: 469:' as a verdict has been reached, a conviction has been secured and published in the court record. Unless another judicial ruling overrules the previous, then it shouldn't be removed. 1949:

On a separate matter, since it seems quite obvious that you are (or are suggesting you are) an associate of Mr. Gordon Banks, or someone with a close relationship, you should read

720:

drunk driving - all I see is one source for this (I tried searching for more), and it doesn't seem connected to his public persona. If this were better sourced I'd change my mind.

2388:

Two incidents, one source each. This isn't good enough, so I have removed this material. Anyone wanting to readd it should first get agreement on this talk page for doing so. --

1905:

Mr Gordon Banks has worked in British Intelligence for years. His current assignment in red type is no less a cover than working for the FCO as, say, a Second or First Secretary.

2579: 241: 218: 851:

as per above - I see no valid reason why it shouldn't as both were reported on, Also I've changed "Drunk driving" to "Drink driving" as that's what's used in the UK, Thanks, –

475: 43: 1445:

reliable third-party sources, so apparently it is not noteworthy or relevant to this living individual or it would have been widely reported on, so it shoud be left out per

1751:

so it would appear that Banks was responsible for the details for his entry. I haven't been able to indepently verify any of the following claims from his alleged entry in

967:) 14:05, 29 June 2017 (UTC) Note - I cut down the text just to mention the fine and driving-ban. Still not sure it should be in, but if it is in - it shouldn't be too long. 2599: 1102: 494:'. I think you should look up what fake news actually is before you start making false accusations of libellous journalism. The journalist was just trying to do his job. 2163: 1204:

charge. If the paper was forced to retract the claim due to libel (and not just this "right to be forgotten" business) - this would impact our use of the information.

2060:. If you are here to be a Knowledge editor, I suggest you cut your teeth on a subject which you are not involved with for a few months or years first. If you are 826:

Summoned by a bot - I agree with the comment above that the drunk driving is worth noting in addition to the suspension, based on the subject's profession. However

1088:

Mr. Banks seems to have been arrested at one point for drink driving and fleeing police. This arrest and the events surrounding it were covered by a newspaper,

2559: 48: 31:) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or 1566:, there was no requirement for multiple sources, and when you quoted that section of the policy in your last comment, you included every last word of it, 937:

applies in this case because it is not a viewpoint which is held in an opinionated manner, rather it is a factual court order. Maybe i'm interpreting the

2039:, you are correct that Moist towelett and Rhumidian are the same person. Sometimes a user has a reason to change their user name, and does so using our 1069:", here's a breakdown of what seems to have happened here (assuming the above IP is Mr. Banks communicating with us and is being completely forthright): 1902:

What one feels worrying is that unless there is a newspaper article it doesn't exist to some writers. In fact some press articles are not true anyway.

1003:

What if the subject has made legal threats towards the media and has been using googles 'right to be removed' in order to remove coverage of bad media?

2132:

It is in the newspaper article. Bringing no charges is rather different from the statement issued and subsequently reported by the Daily Telegraph.

1391:

it can be taken directly to an admin or ANI and its likely to get an immediate response; this is one thing the mop corps does not dilly-dally with.

2584: 2564: 1200:

Looking at the IP's claims in the talk above, it would seem he was also asserting google's "right to be forgotten" and also possibly some form of

466: 147: 23: 797:

argument the preceding two editors have tried to make here, but I think a brief mention of the event is in keeping with that consideration.

233: 212: 2240: 905: 543:

on other wikipedia users, please keep criticism strictly content related, not user related (unless it it issued in a constructive manner).

151: 2465: 2446: 2410: 2356: 2335: 2319: 2311: 2192: 427: 2140: 1877: 1855: 2541: 2489: 155: 2261: 462: 346: 146:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to 1967:

on this project (in short, you have to put up evidence when you make such assertions or they may be seen as a form of unwarranted

474:

If you feel like you wish to discuss the issue further then use the "help me" template on your talk page or post a dispute on the

516: 398: 382: 1953:, because depending on that relationship, you may be required to disclose your conflict of interest on your user page and here. 324: 142: 100: 567: 504: 362: 316: 246: 2158:

relating to Contempt of Court. At NO stage has Mr Gordon-Banks or his representatives sought to pursue the young reporter. A

1844:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

1318:

Given his approach to this problem, I gave a very detailed look to his comments above to make sure that there had been no

1273: 887: 540: 2135:

We hope an editor might be good enough to look at your DT source article and agree this suggestion is fairer. Thank you.

876:

I might be able to find stronger and more reliable source (a court record) for the drink driving offences, as stated by

75: 2129:

no crime had been committed" - (In fact it was Dr Sir Oliver Letwin who was cautioned by the information Commissioner)

1936:

model that is meant to remove our editors from making their own evlauations of the facts, as this would compromise our

1534:

one has presented multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the incident, so my position is - leave it out per

1925: 603: 1791:

worked as private secretary to Cecil Franks...and from 1989 he was senior adviser on Middle East affairs for LBJ Ltd.

2040: 1921: 664:

What do you think about the recent edits (resignation from liberal democrats and drink driving), Should they stay?

2047:

the same thing as using two separate accounts, without disclosing the relationship between them (this is known as

1968: 1143: 1106: 781: 2504: 2288: 2244: 2010: 1830: 1281: 1036: 1008: 986: 946: 901: 698: 672: 548: 528: 365:) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection. This user has been banned and 63: 2469: 2450: 2339: 2196: 431: 2414: 2360: 2323: 2315: 320: 32: 2265: 2373: 1933: 1800:

obtained an MBA from the Donald Harrison School of Business at Southeast Missouri State University in 2001

1563: 1514: 1426: 1319: 1139: 742: 634: 1121:

However, most public-facing websites are routinely archived by certain automated projects; one of these,

423:

matter what the consequences or by what method and I must now question his suitability as a Wiki Editor.

2002: 1929: 1066: 340: 81: 1806:

joined the Defence Academy of the United Kingdom as Senior Research Fellow, Middle East and South Asia,

1509:

to any conclusions "that a BLP claim has to be verified by multiple sources". I'm simply quoting what

2057: 1964: 1937: 1765: 1548: 1459: 956: 893: 839: 790: 759: 686: 392: 376: 42:. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to 1702:

He resigned at the end of 2016 (or at least the wiki article say so) - and this happened afterwards.

2500: 2284: 2088: 2006: 1990: 1826: 1645: 1498: 1410: 1277: 1238: 1189: 1122: 1032: 1004: 982: 942: 897: 816: 694: 668: 648: 618: 589: 544: 524: 366: 330: 249:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

2110: 2053: 1910: 1869: 597: 356: 46:.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see 1864:

His work is similar to FCO. No media reports would exist as intelligence work is too sensitive.

1125:

preserved a snapshot of the original story, so when the original version of the article on the

2280: 2065: 2061: 2048: 1707: 1475: 1209: 1055: 1031:

Well I mean the subject had admitted to taking the journalist to oxford crown court above...

1022: 972: 964: 924: 881: 725: 1788:

chairman of the Schools Committee from 1985 to 1986 and the Works Committee from 1986 to 1987

1439:, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it 1422: 1147: 1131: 1090: 794: 785: 777: 690: 593: 336: 134: 2429: 2393: 2069:

without any particular stake in how the subject is presented, beyond objective interest).

1960: 1891: 1809:

Director, Middle East and South Asia, of the International Institute for Strategic Affairs

1756: 1752: 1744: 1539: 1450: 938: 934: 916: 915:

If it is not discussed in secondary sources (beyond Oxford Times), there is a question of

831: 827: 750: 426:

It is especially difficult when I am representing my country in Moscow right this moment.

388: 372: 39: 1749:

What makes Who's Who unique is that each biographee provides the details for their entry,

2213:

PLEASE could you help me. I AM the subject and my email address not to be published is

2070: 1998: 1972: 1941: 1821:

Back to the right to be forgotten, take a look at the allegation of fraud paragraph on

1627: 1480: 1392: 1220: 1171: 1098: 852: 798: 640: 610: 661:

There has been a dispute about edits made by myself from the subject of the article.

180: 2553: 2106: 2036: 2020: 1950: 1906: 1865: 1813: 1535: 1510: 1446: 1430: 352: 2236: 2215: 1703: 1205: 1051: 1046: 1018: 968: 960: 920: 877: 721: 2382:

reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out.

749:

reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out.

1797:

secretary of the Anglo-United Arab Emirates Parliamentary Group from 1993 to 1997

1526:

reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out

1017:

You need a RS covering that. If you got one it may be notable in and of it self.

349:) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection. 2545: 2508: 2493: 2473: 2454: 2433: 2418: 2397: 2343: 2327: 2269: 2248: 2200: 2167: 2144: 2114: 2090: 2014: 1992: 1914: 1881: 1859: 1834: 1774: 1711: 1647: 1562:

Fair enough, but do consider the source of my confusion here: when last I read

1557: 1500: 1468: 1412: 1285: 1240: 1213: 1191: 1059: 1040: 1026: 1012: 990: 976: 950: 928: 909: 864: 843: 818: 768: 729: 702: 676: 655: 625: 552: 532: 435: 118: 94: 2425: 2389: 2019:

Thanks for clearing that up, MT. I was skeptical of the claim, but trying to

329:

Their edits to this article were last checked for neutrality on 23-05-2019 by

124: 315:

to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include

491: 453: 716:

Lib-Dem suspension + twitter "rant" - this is material to a public figure.

461:

Now, onto the content I added. I believe that it is not in violation of

1748: 1441:(emphasis mine). This incident (drunk driving) has not been covered by 830:

should definitely be kept in mind when it comes to the drunk driving.

2023:

with this new user, not withstanding the obvious SPA situation here.

154:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the 592:'s edits. The survey clearly shows support for their inclusion. 1142:

standards is that, at the time it was created, the article was a

596:

and criminal offences committed by public officials is certainly

2440:

1996-7 Parliamentary Private Secretary @ Dept of the Environment

2302:

The items to which you refer AND the history has been removed.

689:

although i do believe that there could be some ce to conform to

1924:

other than newspapers, but for most purposes, we need reliable

1513:(an English Knowledge policy) states, specifically the section 1130:

However, as the Wayback Machine is operated by the U.S.-based

300: 57: 38:

from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially

15: 2460:

1992 Gordon Banks made the only Conservative gain in England

179: 2575:

Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles

2154:

To those editors who mention the Oxford Mail, two points.

1435:

If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and

313:

contributors may be personally or professionally connected

2570:

Start-Class biography (politics and government) articles

419:

simply because it no longer appears on a Google search.

1896:

Mr Gordon Banks was NOT arrested for anything in 2017.

1822: 1785:

leaving the Army in 1983 with a war disablement pension

2595:

Low-importance Politics of the United Kingdom articles

1109:

to search engines), Banks can apply to Google to have

1932:

of the source. This is because Knowledge works on a

1779:

educated privately and at Sheffield Hallam University

1417:

I don't see anyone arguing that The Oxford Times is

566:

The following discussion is an archived record of a

259:

Knowledge:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom

245:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2590:

Start-Class Politics of the United Kingdom articles

1794:

chairman of the Anglo-Venezuela Parliamentary Group

1421:a reliable source. And my argument is not based on 576:

No further edits should be made to this discussion.

262:

Template:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom

741:drunk driving. I think Banks qualifies as being a 633:Please see the updated determination of consensus 539:Also might i remind you, you should refrain from 452:If you believe that the content was created in 1803:adviser to the Joint Security Industry Council 465:. I also believe I am also not violating the ' 456:, then you may dispute that content edit here. 2064:to help build an encyclopedia, but rather to 1963:or some other kind of support, is considered 1105:which extended certain provisions of the the 579:A summary of the conclusions reached follows. 8: 685:Subject is a politician and do is covered by 2580:Politics and government work group articles 401:) This user has contributed to the article. 385:) This user has contributed to the article. 61: 891: 447:Include citations for any material you add 242:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom 207: 89: 2600:Articles edited by connected contributors 476:biographies of living persons noticeboard 2137:2A00:23C1:6C0C:A401:4883:4AA5:5319:84AD 1940:and open the door to numerous kinds of 1874:2A00:23C1:6C0C:A401:4883:4AA5:5319:84AD 1852:2A00:23C1:6C0C:A401:4883:4AA5:5319:84AD 265:Politics of the United Kingdom articles 209: 91: 2538:2A00:23A8:983:6D01:40F8:7679:FA3D:A237 2486:2A00:23A8:983:6D01:7909:63A8:F375:7FCF 2160:2A00:23C1:6C0C:A401:46F:4B2D:1911:C344 693:which could be made by other editors.) 191:the politics and government work group 2234:Your sincerely, Matthew Gordon-Banks 1782:a BA (Hons) in history and economics. 559:RfC on recent edits by Moist towelett 7: 2424:Yes. You have already said this. -- 239:This article is within the scope of 140:This article is within the scope of 2560:Biography articles of living people 2001:to my current name, Im not using a 941:wrong? Anyone willing to chime in? 80:It is of interest to the following 2515:JKA HARPER Re Matthew Gordon-Banks 1997:I simply had my name changed from 1522:mention of it. If you cannot find 955:My apologies, I should have cited 367:may therefore be reverted on sight 14: 1425:, my argument is that Banks is a 463:Knowledge Policies and guidelines 1840:The discussion above is closed. 793:extends from. I understand the 304: 232: 211: 127: 117: 93: 62: 21:This article must adhere to the 2404:Recent Edits _"Failure to Stop" 2318:) 19:56, 30 November 2018 (UTC) 279:This article has been rated as 164:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography 2585:WikiProject Biography articles 2565:Start-Class biography articles 1272:myself and could be breaching 505:Help:Using_the_Wayback_Machine 256:Politics of the United Kingdom 247:Politics of the United Kingdom 219:Politics of the United Kingdom 167:Template:WikiProject Biography 1: 2474:17:58, 21 December 2018 (UTC) 2455:17:48, 21 December 2018 (UTC) 2328:20:02, 30 November 2018 (UTC) 2270:06:33, 18 November 2018 (UTC) 2249:01:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC) 2120:Accuracy, Apology and Promise 1274:Knowledge:No personal attacks 441:Hello. Hälsingar. Buongiorno. 253:and see a list of open tasks. 188:This article is supported by 24:biographies of living persons 2434:14:16, 3 December 2018 (UTC) 2419:13:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC) 2398:14:15, 3 December 2018 (UTC) 2344:11:21, 1 December 2018 (UTC) 2150:This Alleged Drink Drive Biz 1700:is he still a public figure? 737:suspension/twitter content, 152:contribute to the discussion 2546:22:49, 13 August 2021 (UTC) 2168:02:40, 11 August 2017 (UTC) 2043:policy. Note that this is 1872:) 22:04, 24 July 2017 (UTC) 1097:Under recently-established 36:must be removed immediately 2616: 2509:22:22, 7 August 2021 (UTC) 2499:Umm…When did I get banned 2145:17:30, 7 August 2017 (UTC) 1882:17:41, 7 August 2017 (UTC) 1860:17:41, 7 August 2017 (UTC) 1816:near Fochabers, Morayshire 1698:Another question to ask - 656:17:34, 2 August 2017 (UTC) 285:project's importance scale 2494:01:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC) 2350:Failure to Stop Last edit 2115:22:20, 24 July 2017 (UTC) 2091:20:37, 26 July 2017 (UTC) 2015:14:16, 26 July 2017 (UTC) 1993:10:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC) 1915:22:17, 24 July 2017 (UTC) 1835:00:44, 21 July 2017 (UTC) 1107:Data Protection Directive 1041:12:49, 30 June 2017 (UTC) 1027:00:58, 30 June 2017 (UTC) 1013:20:04, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 991:14:13, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 977:14:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 951:14:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 929:13:25, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 910:13:20, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 865:20:49, 15 July 2017 (UTC) 769:19:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 730:12:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 677:01:16, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 626:18:01, 30 July 2017 (UTC) 594:Knowledge is not censored 553:14:04, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 533:00:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC) 436:22:44, 27 June 2017 (UTC) 278: 227: 187: 112: 88: 2201:09:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC) 1842:Please do not modify it. 1775:20:15, 6 July 2017 (UTC) 1712:15:58, 6 July 2017 (UTC) 1648:20:58, 7 July 2017 (UTC) 1558:15:50, 6 July 2017 (UTC) 1501:18:20, 5 July 2017 (UTC) 1469:14:42, 5 July 2017 (UTC) 1413:21:30, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 1286:17:35, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 1241:21:30, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 1214:09:56, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 1192:08:01, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 1060:07:11, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 844:20:48, 7 July 2017 (UTC) 819:06:54, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 703:18:21, 4 July 2017 (UTC) 681:(A note of my opinion: 573:Please do not modify it. 311:The following Knowledge 467:People accused of crime 106:Politics and Government 1920:Bulldog, we do accept 1887:Alleged Arrest in 2017 184: 70:This article is rated 1067:Right to be Forgotten 784:) is insufficient to 325:neutral point of view 183: 143:WikiProject Biography 2479:Matthew Gordon-Banks 2206:Matthew Gordon Banks 2174:Matthew Gordon Banks 1959:repeatedly, without 1926:WP:Secondary sources 1517:which says in full: 483:Now for the dispute: 317:conflict of interest 2041:WP:user name change 1922:WP:reliable sources 1429:, which is part of 1123:The Wayback Machine 1101:law (specifically, 871:Threaded discussion 568:request for comment 1969:WP:Personal attack 1144:WP:reliable source 782:WP:Reliable source 585:The result was to 185: 170:biography articles 76:content assessment 2170:s at 11 Aug 2017 1433:, which states - 1170:reliable source. 912: 896:comment added by 607: 604:non-admin closure 407: 406: 299: 298: 295: 294: 291: 290: 206: 205: 202: 201: 56: 55: 2607: 2239: 2238: 2218: 2217: 2210:Hello Everyone. 2084: 2081: 2078: 2075: 1986: 1983: 1980: 1977: 1772: 1763: 1641: 1638: 1635: 1632: 1555: 1546: 1494: 1491: 1488: 1485: 1466: 1457: 1406: 1403: 1400: 1397: 1234: 1231: 1228: 1225: 1185: 1182: 1179: 1176: 1132:Internet Archive 1127:The Oxford Times 1091:The Oxford Times 862: 857: 836: 812: 809: 806: 803: 778:The Oxford Times 776:I don't see how 766: 757: 653: 651: 646: 643: 623: 621: 616: 613: 601: 575: 541:personal attacks 308: 307: 301: 267: 266: 263: 260: 257: 236: 229: 228: 223: 215: 208: 172: 171: 168: 165: 162: 148:join the project 137: 135:Biography portal 132: 131: 130: 121: 114: 113: 108: 97: 90: 73: 67: 66: 58: 44:this noticeboard 16: 2615: 2614: 2610: 2609: 2608: 2606: 2605: 2604: 2550: 2549: 2517: 2481: 2462: 2442: 2406: 2374:WP:PUBLICFIGURE 2352: 2300: 2235: 2214: 2208: 2176: 2152: 2122: 2103: 2082: 2079: 2076: 2073: 1984: 1981: 1978: 1975: 1934:WP:Verification 1889: 1846: 1845: 1766: 1757: 1639: 1636: 1633: 1630: 1564:WP:PUBLICFIGURE 1549: 1540: 1515:WP:PUBLICFIGURE 1492: 1489: 1486: 1483: 1460: 1451: 1437:well documented 1427:WP:PUBLICFIGURE 1404: 1401: 1398: 1395: 1320:WP:LEGALTHREATS 1232: 1229: 1226: 1223: 1183: 1180: 1177: 1174: 1140:WP:Verification 933:I dont believe 873: 858: 853: 832: 810: 807: 804: 801: 760: 751: 743:WP:PUBLICFIGURE 710: 649: 644: 641: 639: 629: 619: 614: 611: 609: 571: 561: 517:Manual of style 412: 305: 264: 261: 258: 255: 254: 221: 169: 166: 163: 160: 159: 133: 128: 126: 103: 74:on Knowledge's 71: 12: 11: 5: 2613: 2611: 2603: 2602: 2597: 2592: 2587: 2582: 2577: 2572: 2567: 2562: 2552: 2551: 2516: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2501:Moist towelett 2480: 2477: 2461: 2458: 2441: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2405: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2385: 2384: 2370: 2369: 2351: 2348: 2347: 2346: 2299: 2296: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2292: 2285:Moist towelett 2273: 2272: 2241:62.128.207.104 2229: 2207: 2204: 2175: 2172: 2151: 2148: 2121: 2118: 2102: 2099: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2007:Moist towelett 1999:User:Rhumidian 1955: 1954: 1946: 1945: 1930:WP:independent 1888: 1885: 1848: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1827:Moist towelett 1818: 1817: 1810: 1807: 1804: 1801: 1798: 1795: 1792: 1789: 1786: 1783: 1780: 1753:Who's Who (UK) 1737: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1732: 1731: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1325: 1324: 1301: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1278:Moist towelett 1256: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1249: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1135: 1119: 1115: 1099:European Union 1095: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1062: 1045:That would be 1033:Moist towelett 1005:Moist towelett 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 983:Moist towelett 943:Moist towelett 898:Moist towelett 872: 869: 868: 867: 846: 821: 771: 732: 709: 706: 695:Moist towelett 669:Moist towelett 659: 658: 630: 590:Moist towelett 583: 582: 581: 562: 560: 557: 556: 555: 545:Moist towelett 536: 535: 525:Moist towelett 521: 520: 511: 510: 509: 508: 498: 497: 496: 495: 485: 484: 480: 479: 471: 470: 458: 457: 450: 442: 411: 410:Moist towelett 408: 405: 404: 403: 402: 386: 370: 350: 331:Moist_towelett 328: 309: 297: 296: 293: 292: 289: 288: 281:Low-importance 277: 271: 270: 268: 251:the discussion 237: 225: 224: 222:Low‑importance 216: 204: 203: 200: 199: 196:Low-importance 186: 176: 175: 173: 139: 138: 122: 110: 109: 98: 86: 85: 79: 68: 54: 53: 49:this help page 33:poorly sourced 19: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2612: 2601: 2598: 2596: 2593: 2591: 2588: 2586: 2583: 2581: 2578: 2576: 2573: 2571: 2568: 2566: 2563: 2561: 2558: 2557: 2555: 2548: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2533: 2529: 2525: 2521: 2514: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2491: 2487: 2478: 2476: 2475: 2471: 2467: 2466:92.29.194.218 2459: 2457: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2447:92.29.194.218 2439: 2435: 2431: 2427: 2423: 2422: 2421: 2420: 2416: 2412: 2411:62.128.217.97 2403: 2399: 2395: 2391: 2387: 2386: 2383: 2379: 2375: 2372: 2371: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2362: 2358: 2357:62.128.217.97 2349: 2345: 2341: 2337: 2336:95.144.83.166 2332: 2331: 2330: 2329: 2325: 2321: 2320:62.128.217.99 2317: 2313: 2312:62.128.217.99 2307: 2303: 2298:Moist Towlett 2297: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2271: 2267: 2263: 2258: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2232: 2227: 2223: 2219: 2211: 2205: 2203: 2202: 2198: 2194: 2193:92.38.138.111 2188: 2184: 2183:Public Life. 2180: 2173: 2171: 2169: 2165: 2161: 2155: 2149: 2147: 2146: 2142: 2138: 2133: 2130: 2126: 2119: 2117: 2116: 2112: 2108: 2100: 2092: 2089: 2087: 2086: 2085: 2067: 2063: 2059: 2058:WP:guidelines 2055: 2050: 2046: 2042: 2038: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2022: 2018: 2017: 2016: 2012: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1991: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1970: 1966: 1965:WP:disruptive 1962: 1957: 1956: 1952: 1948: 1947: 1943: 1939: 1938:WP:Neutrality 1935: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1903: 1900: 1897: 1894: 1893: 1886: 1884: 1883: 1879: 1875: 1871: 1867: 1862: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1843: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1819: 1815: 1814:Gordon Castle 1811: 1808: 1805: 1802: 1799: 1796: 1793: 1790: 1787: 1784: 1781: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1773: 1771: 1770: 1764: 1762: 1761: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1742: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1649: 1646: 1644: 1643: 1642: 1624: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1596: 1569: 1565: 1561: 1560: 1559: 1556: 1554: 1553: 1547: 1545: 1544: 1537: 1532: 1527: 1525: 1519: 1518: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1504: 1503: 1502: 1499: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1477: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1467: 1465: 1464: 1458: 1456: 1455: 1448: 1444: 1440: 1438: 1432: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1411: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1347: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1321: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1287: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1270: 1269: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1257: 1242: 1239: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1203: 1199: 1198: 1195: 1194: 1193: 1190: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1136: 1133: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1104: 1103:a CJEU ruling 1100: 1096: 1093: 1092: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1068: 1063: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1048: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1038: 1034: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1024: 1020: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1002: 992: 988: 984: 980: 979: 978: 974: 970: 966: 962: 958: 957:WP:PROPORTION 954: 953: 952: 948: 944: 940: 936: 932: 931: 930: 926: 922: 918: 914: 913: 911: 907: 903: 899: 895: 889: 886: 883: 879: 875: 874: 870: 866: 863: 861: 856: 850: 847: 845: 841: 837: 835: 829: 825: 822: 820: 817: 815: 814: 813: 796: 792: 791:WP:Notability 787: 783: 779: 775: 772: 770: 767: 765: 764: 758: 756: 755: 748: 744: 740: 736: 733: 731: 727: 723: 719: 715: 712: 711: 707: 705: 704: 700: 696: 692: 688: 687:WP:Notability 684: 679: 678: 674: 670: 665: 662: 657: 654: 652: 647: 636: 632: 631: 628: 627: 624: 622: 617: 605: 599: 595: 591: 588: 580: 577: 574: 569: 564: 563: 558: 554: 550: 546: 542: 538: 537: 534: 530: 526: 523: 522: 518: 513: 512: 506: 502: 501: 500: 499: 493: 489: 488: 487: 486: 482: 481: 477: 473: 472: 468: 464: 460: 459: 455: 451: 448: 443: 440: 439: 438: 437: 433: 429: 428:95.213.152.61 424: 420: 416: 409: 400: 397: 394: 390: 387: 384: 381: 378: 374: 371: 368: 364: 361: 358: 354: 351: 348: 345: 342: 338: 335: 334: 332: 326: 322: 321:autobiography 318: 314: 310: 303: 302: 286: 282: 276: 273: 272: 269: 252: 248: 244: 243: 238: 235: 231: 230: 226: 220: 217: 214: 210: 197: 194:(assessed as 193: 192: 182: 178: 177: 174: 157: 156:documentation 153: 149: 145: 144: 136: 125: 123: 120: 116: 115: 111: 107: 102: 99: 96: 92: 87: 83: 77: 69: 65: 60: 59: 51: 50: 45: 41: 37: 34: 30: 26: 25: 20: 18: 17: 2534: 2530: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2482: 2463: 2443: 2407: 2381: 2377: 2353: 2308: 2304: 2301: 2281:Philip Cross 2256: 2233: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2212: 2209: 2189: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2156: 2153: 2134: 2131: 2127: 2123: 2104: 2072: 2071: 2044: 1974: 1973: 1904: 1901: 1898: 1895: 1890: 1863: 1847: 1841: 1768: 1767: 1759: 1758: 1740: 1699: 1629: 1628: 1622: 1567: 1551: 1550: 1542: 1541: 1523: 1520: 1506: 1482: 1481: 1462: 1461: 1453: 1452: 1442: 1436: 1434: 1418: 1394: 1393: 1222: 1221: 1201: 1173: 1172: 1126: 1110: 1089: 892:— Preceding 884: 859: 854: 848: 833: 823: 800: 799: 773: 762: 761: 753: 752: 746: 738: 734: 717: 713: 682: 680: 666: 663: 660: 638: 608: 586: 584: 578: 572: 565: 446: 425: 421: 417: 413: 395: 379: 359: 343: 312: 280: 240: 189: 141: 82:WikiProjects 47: 35: 28: 22: 2528:resigned. 2262:2.218.14.42 2054:WP:policies 718:Weak remove 337:Strathisla1 72:Start-class 2554:Categories 2255:Teahouse) 2237:(Redacted) 2216:(Redacted) 2066:WP:PROMOTE 2062:WP:NOTHERE 2049:WP:SOCKING 2003:sockpuppet 1892:Isaidnoway 1760:Isaidnoway 1543:Isaidnoway 1476:WP:BALANCE 1454:Isaidnoway 834:Comatmebro 780:(surely a 774:Keep both. 754:Isaidnoway 389:Diplomat44 373:Charlbury4 2334:concerns. 1928:that are 1823:this edit 1745:Who's Who 1741:Biography 1423:WP:WEIGHT 1148:WP:WEIGHT 849:Keep both 824:Keep both 795:WP:WEIGHT 786:WP:verify 691:WP:WEIGHT 492:Fake news 454:Bad faith 161:Biography 101:Biography 40:libellous 2380:multiple 2107:Bulldog4 2037:Bulldog4 1961:WP:diffs 1907:Bulldog4 1866:Bulldog4 1524:multiple 1505:I'm not 1443:multiple 939:WP:UNDUE 935:WP:UNDUE 917:WP:UNDUE 906:contribs 894:unsigned 888:contribs 828:WP:UNDUE 747:multiple 667:Thanks. 598:relevant 399:contribs 383:contribs 363:contribs 353:Bulldog4 347:contribs 1942:WP:BIAS 1704:Icewhiz 1507:jumping 1206:Icewhiz 1052:Icewhiz 1019:Icewhiz 969:Icewhiz 961:Icewhiz 921:Icewhiz 878:Icewhiz 739:exclude 722:Icewhiz 645:Strauss 615:Strauss 283:on the 2376:says: 2021:WP:AGF 1951:WP:COI 1850:email. 1769:(talk) 1568:except 1552:(talk) 1536:WP:BLP 1511:WP:BLP 1463:(talk) 1447:WP:BLP 1431:WP:BLP 763:(talk) 708:Survey 323:, and 78:scale. 2426:Hoary 2390:Hoary 2101:Proof 1812:owns 1202:libel 1111:links 1047:WP:OR 855:Davey 2542:talk 2505:talk 2490:talk 2470:talk 2451:talk 2430:talk 2415:talk 2394:talk 2361:talk 2340:talk 2324:talk 2316:talk 2289:talk 2266:talk 2245:talk 2197:talk 2164:talk 2141:talk 2111:talk 2056:and 2011:talk 1911:talk 1878:talk 1870:talk 1856:talk 1831:talk 1708:talk 1623:were 1282:talk 1210:talk 1056:talk 1037:talk 1023:talk 1009:talk 987:talk 973:talk 965:talk 947:talk 925:talk 902:talk 882:talk 860:2010 840:talk 735:Keep 726:talk 714:Keep 699:talk 683:Keep 673:talk 650:talk 635:here 620:talk 587:keep 549:talk 529:talk 432:talk 393:talk 377:talk 357:talk 341:talk 150:and 2536:of. 2368:go. 2045:not 1419:not 890:). 637:. 600:. 275:Low 29:BLP 2556:: 2544:) 2507:) 2492:) 2472:) 2453:) 2432:) 2417:) 2396:) 2363:) 2342:) 2326:) 2268:) 2257:is 2247:) 2199:) 2166:) 2143:) 2113:) 2013:) 1971:. 1913:) 1880:) 1858:) 1833:) 1743:, 1710:) 1284:) 1212:) 1058:) 1039:) 1025:) 1011:) 989:) 975:) 949:) 927:) 908:) 904:• 842:) 728:) 701:) 675:) 642:Dr 612:Dr 570:. 551:) 531:) 434:) 333:. 327:. 319:, 198:). 104:: 2540:( 2503:( 2488:( 2468:( 2449:( 2428:( 2413:( 2392:( 2359:( 2338:( 2322:( 2314:( 2291:) 2287:( 2264:( 2243:( 2195:( 2162:( 2139:( 2109:( 2083:w 2080:o 2077:n 2074:S 2009:( 2005:. 1985:w 1982:o 1979:n 1976:S 1909:( 1876:( 1868:( 1854:( 1829:( 1825:. 1755:. 1706:( 1640:w 1637:o 1634:n 1631:S 1538:. 1528:. 1493:w 1490:o 1487:n 1484:S 1449:. 1405:w 1402:o 1399:n 1396:S 1280:( 1276:. 1233:w 1230:o 1227:n 1224:S 1208:( 1184:w 1181:o 1178:n 1175:S 1094:. 1065:" 1054:( 1035:( 1021:( 1007:( 985:( 971:( 963:( 945:( 923:( 900:( 885:· 880:( 838:( 811:w 808:o 805:n 802:S 724:( 697:( 671:( 606:) 602:( 547:( 527:( 519:. 478:. 449:. 430:( 396:· 391:( 380:· 375:( 369:. 360:· 355:( 344:· 339:( 287:. 158:. 84:: 52:. 27:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index