Jump to content

Talk:Gordon Brown: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Morcus (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 190: Line 190:


This article seems to be written with a negative bias against the prime minister. Could it not be written in a more neutral tone? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.129.75.13|86.129.75.13]] ([[User talk:86.129.75.13|talk]]) 22:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
This article seems to be written with a negative bias against the prime minister. Could it not be written in a more neutral tone? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.129.75.13|86.129.75.13]] ([[User talk:86.129.75.13|talk]]) 22:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

I'd say the article is fairly neutral. Many politicians have "controversies" in their articles. Also, Gordon Brown is very unpopular in Britain as of late.[[Special:Contributions/62.31.242.55|62.31.242.55]] ([[User talk:62.31.242.55|talk]]) 15:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:10, 5 May 2008

Good articleGordon Brown has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 26, 2006Good article nomineeListed

Template:V0.5

Golden Brown

I added "The gold sales have earned him the pejorative nickname Golden Brown, and there is also a satirical parody song by the same name." which was undone by TheologyJohn on the grounds that "rare nickname - never heard it, and I am a fair bit of a politics". Leaving aside our own TaxFreeGold website, may I cite a leading article in The Guardian Thursday March 11, 1999 [[1]]. Google shows over 11,000 entries for +"golden brown" +"gordon brown" [[2]]. I consider my addition to have been accurate, relevant, and as neutral as possible considering its subject matter. Lawrence Chard 09:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right, it was a valid edit that deserves to be there, and I've restored it. I don't want to apologise as such because I don't believe I was morally culpable for removing it, but I was certainly in factual error, and I am sorry if that in any way offended you or anything.
The reason I removed it without fact-checking first is simply the fact that, as I'm sure you'll understand, pages on important political figures tend to get filled of all sorts of random little insignificant factoids that support the political views of whoever edits the page.
While I'm not academically trained in politics and don't understand the subject to that level, I do spend upwards of 10-15 hours a week reading and learning about it, and cannot recall ever coming across that nickname - although I may of course misremember. Under those , I didn't see the point of doing research - if I did that on everything on those pages (or similarly initially suspect edits elsewhere), I would have significantly less time for other things on wikipedia - especially as I was operating entirely within the rules of wikipedia.
WP:Verify states:
The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material.
and
Any edit lacking a source may be removed.
TJ 17:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The correct spelling of satire is without a "Y". I have added a "citation needed" tag to your amusing edit.Phase4 19:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The (presumably) American spell-checker on my PC tried to correct my satyrical to satirical, but our copy of The Oxford English Dictionary, second edition volume XIV, gives both spellings. The entry for satire states "also satyre".Lawrence Chard 21:44, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but "satyre" is a different word. Just because "board" and "bored" are said the same, they are of course completely different words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crieff405 (talkcontribs) 08:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When a different spelling is under the same definitionit means the same thing so its nothing like Board and Bored. Satyre is an older spelling. many words in English have multiple spellings because its based on west german languages and Norman French (A latin based language). Both are acceptable but Satire is better because it's more universally accepted.(Morcus (talk) 22:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Brown stealing Tories ideas

Anyone think this deserves a mention? (Willieboyisaloser 14:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Maybe, if it is properly sourced. I'm not sure that your user name is appropriate. Who is this "Willieboy"? Viewfinder 16:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, which Tory ideas does Willieboyisaloser have in mind?Phase4 19:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it's made clear that they are only accusations that don't actually hold up considering they have touched on inheritance tax and non domiciles before - and stopping non domiciles is pretty important to economic prosperity which Brown has frequently said he is aiming for. That part of this article is clearly written by some Tory prat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.144.237 (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Au contraire- knee jerk reaction by Brown to a strong performance by Cameron and a reflected bounce in the polls. It is essential to ensure that labour sycophants don't take over the editing of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob77 (talkcontribs) 14:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brown is not just a Tory but a Thatcherite just as Blair was before him. There is no substantial difference between him and Cameron.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 08:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Something wired is happening. I'm trying to revert recent vandalism, but my edit isn't taking. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Head of state in infobox

There's currently a disturbance at the current Canadian prime minister's article, Stephen Harper, regarding the inclusion of the head of state in the article's infobox, and, following that, on all previous Canadian prime ministers' articles; currently the Canadian series is the only one, as far as I can tell, where the relevant head of state is not listed in the infobox.

As this article, and all those for previous British prime ministers, list the head of state in the infobox, I'm wondering how the decision to do so was reached, and if this practice should or should not be the same for all PMs' articles. It seems odd to me that one series of PM articles would be different to all the rest.

Opinions are welcome; needed actually. The discussion is taking place at Talk:Stephen Harper#Infobox -- include GG and monarch?. --G2bambino 15:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why all PM's in all countries need the exact same infobox. The monarch technically appoints the Prime Minister and in the early days of the British premiership the monarch had considerable influence over who was appointed PM so I think it's an important part of the British PM infobox—British PMs still go to "kiss hands" at Buckingham Palace. Canadian and Australian PM infoboxes will differ because of the strong republican feeling in those countries and because when they started having PM's they were already constitutional monarchies with the monarch having no influence in the appointment.--Johnbull 17:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Given the succession to the Premiership of Alex Douglas Home, and the first General Election of 1974, I'd suggest the monarch still holds significant influence over who to appoint - if only in certain circumstances Whitstable (talk) 17:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Home was appointed before the Conservatives had formal leadership elections. And the monarch didn't appoint anyone in February 1974 - Heath did not resign his office (and constitutionally there was no requirement to - the Commons had not yet voted him out and it wasn't clear if he could or couldn't form a government). Remember Heath left Downing Street in less time after the election than many Prime Ministers do in clear cut results, both in the UK (e.g. Baldwin in 1929) or elsewhere in the world (right now John Howard is still the Australian PM, Kevin Rudd won't become so until later in the week). Timrollpickering (talk) 18:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zimbabwe?

What is Gordon Brown's view on Zimbabwe?

– He thinks it's lovely, and would like to go there on holiday. He hears the exchange rate is rather good at the moment, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.189.169.182 (talk) 10:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dictator rubbish

What is this dictator nonsense that we are introduced with on Gordon Brown? This should be edited immediately, as it lowers the stature of Wikipedia as a reliable source of information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.120.235 (talk) 21:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


"Unelected?" <<lost my ID card, so can't remember who I am.>> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.224.81.234 (talk) 11:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair wasn't elected, his party was...did you elect the leader of the opposition?Gavin Scott (talk) 23:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews

There should be a link to http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Category:Gordon_Brown --81.105.245.251 23:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deputy

Is his deputy Harman (his deputy in the House of Commons), Darling (who seems to be the next most powerful cabinet minister), Martin (next in precedence for the gentlemen), Ashton (who has a fixed place in the men's precedence despite being a woman) or Straw (the man previously hought to have been given the positions of Deputy PM and/or First Secretary of State)? Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Can anyone confirm that the signature in the article is really Gordon Brown's signature? It doesn't really look like the kind of signature that an adult would use. UKWikiGuy (talk) 19:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be taken from this page at the Labour website. There's actually another (less messy-looking) signature at this page but it would probably need to be changed into a PNG or SVG to be used here (no idea how to do that myself, alas). Chwech 19:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can well believe that it is Brown's signature. He lost much of his eyesight in an accident, and it is entirely plausible that that would have affected his handwriting in that kind of way. TJ (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't think of that. I assumed that as the image was released under the GFDL it was self made. I think I will raise the issue of the image not being free on the image page UKWikiGuy (talk) 23:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DOB

Can we get a date of birth on this page? Brown was born on 20 February 1951. 79.73.7.33 (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's in the infobox. Mr Stephen (talk) 22:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Monarch in infobox

A debate over the inclusion of the monarch in the infoboxes of Canadian prime ministers, similar to what is done here and at all other British PM articles, has re-emerged at Talk:Stephen Harper#Re-open discussion: Infobox -- include GG and monarch?. Opinions on the matter are welcome, if not necessary! --G2bambino (talk) 03:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gorden Brown's signature

Is that really Brown's signature? It looks totally retarded, the way you would expect a five year old to sign their name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.158.114 (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not Elected

I think that it should be mentioned in the opening paragraph that Gordon Brown was not elected into his position and merely Tony Blair's successor. 82.41.15.93 (talk) 00:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He was elected. We all knew he would succeed Blair. Gavin Scott (talk) 12:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

82.41: - by elected do you mean the voting public? We do not elect prime ministers - this is not the United States! Blair and Brown both met with the Queen if you actually watched the news. When exactly was John Major ever elected by the people when Thatcher left? --Revolt (talk) 19:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In 1992, oh and thats a very inadequate answer to give. This may not be the US and we may not directly vote for the leaders of political parties but when your putting your ballot in the box you'll be thinking Brown, Cameron or some other leader- you won't be thinking about your local candidates too much. Gavin Scott (talk) 16:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Gavin Scott (talk) 16:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You should be, thats who your voting for. All PM's are unelected so it shouldn't be mentioned unless put into context eg. he's never lead his party in a general election.(Morcus (talk) 22:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Political Positions of Gordon Brown

Is there a reason for this article not existing? David Cameron has this article, and they're normally very useful for quickly referring to political positions... --87.194.236.208 (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC) (whoops, should have signed as --CalPaterson (talk) 22:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Driving licence

There is currently a statement in this article that Brown doesn't have a driving licence. How is the webpage cited in any way an authoritative source on the matter? What a joke of an encyclopaedia Wikipedia sometimes reveals itself to be in its acceptance of anything as a reliable source. You have a policy on this, why not stick to it? 79.68.246.120 (talk) 19:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the citation with one to a 2001 Sunday Times article. Thank you for your input. Mr Stephen (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good stuff, thanks! 79.68.246.120 (talk) 00:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The Telegraph has recently apologised for 'misinformation' about the issue of Gordon Brown's driving license. It appears that he does have one.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/march2008/brown-driving2.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nashienet (talkcontribs) 11:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute whether details correct on Gold Sale

Gold sales: Between 1999 and 2002 Brown sold 60% of the UK's gold reserves at $275 an ounce.[37]

I'd raise a question about this source as when I click the link for [37] no page exists so the price of $275 per troy ounce can not be verified. I have the figure as being slightly lower at $250. It would be interesting to see what the figure really is as these Gold Sales were staged over a period of 2 years and sold on different dates it would be good to see an authoritive source detailing all the sale quantities, their dates, and the exchange rate on those dates so we can obtain a true average. John10001 (talk) 19:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: ref 37 at www.archive.org. Mr Stephen (talk) 20:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Factors affecting Gordon Brown's career

Can someone please add the important note that Gordon Brown has an uncanny resemblence to Mr. Bean (a.k.a Rowan Atkinson) - this is seen by some as the main contributing factor to his successful career. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.159.182 (talk) 05:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as Vince Cable stated, Brown went from Stalin to Mr. Bean in just a week. Gavin Scott (talk) 18:53, 8 April 2008

Also, Gordon Brown looks like a paedophile(UTC)

Main picture

Perhaps fitting with the rest of the article, the current top image is out of date and just not very good. Does anyone think an image like this: [3] cc photo may be better? obviously it would need cropping --RedMe (talk) 12:17, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zimbabwean Elections

Mugabe called Gordon Brown a "little tiny dot on the world" on Saturday 12th April 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.185.111 (talk) 22:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Driving licence

This section currently states Gordon Brown does not possess a driving licence. - According to this Telegraph blog post he does indeed possess one. Neither source seems more credible than the other (both political comment pieces in major national newspapers) but given the uncertainty shouldn't this claim be removed? Qwghlm (talk) 15:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this should have been included in the article to begin with. It just seems to be a small piece of unimportant trivia to me. Having said that, [4] and [5] both back up the claim however I still don't believe it's noteworthy enough to be on the page.137.222.215.52 (talk) 14:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've not thought about it before, but I agree, it isn't relevent to the article, so it is now no more... regards, Lynbarn (talk) 15:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

British (Scottish)?

Can we rewrite this to simply "British", or will the Scotch nationalists cause a furore? I'm not being a pedant, it's just that any other politician who happens to be of English origin, is simply referred to as British. Case in point, Tony Blair, Tessa Jowell, David Milliband. 92.232.121.101 (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair is scottish, but yes I agree with you. Gavin Scott (talk) 15:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, surely we have enough evidence of his Britishness: choosing to be an MP rather than an MSP; taking the role of PM; his pronouncements about what it means to be British, etc. Bluewave (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Brown

Resolved

80.42.233.163 (talk) 19:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Gordon Brown's girlfriend mentioned in his Wikipedia entry was not Marion Calder, but Marion Caldwell, whom I remember as a secretary on the Sunday Post newspaper in Glasgow, but who subsequently trained as a lawyer. When last I heard of her she had become an Advocate Depute.[reply]

Willie Morrison, Inverness80.42.233.163 (talk) 19:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC) 80.42.233.163 (talk) 19:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - well spotted --h2g2bob (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

This article seems to be written with a negative bias against the prime minister. Could it not be written in a more neutral tone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.75.13 (talk) 22:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say the article is fairly neutral. Many politicians have "controversies" in their articles. Also, Gordon Brown is very unpopular in Britain as of late.62.31.242.55 (talk) 15:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]