Talk:Anton Du Beke

Tony Beak

The citation for his 'real name' Tony Beak is from a Daily Mail article dated after this article had the name. The way things are going I don't trust the DM not simply to have used this article as its 'source' for the 'information'. An older citation would be better - or one from a more reliable source (e.g. his website, an interview in which the name comes up explicitly). 88888 (talk) 16:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Still not adequately sourced and s far as I am concerned is mere gossip; removed. --kingboyk (talk) 20:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

It is relatively well known in the dance world, but I agree, needs an adequate source to be put in this article Gingernut1015 (talk) 08:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Amateur?

"He left school at 16 to follow an amateur dancing career."

I know little about ballroom dancing, so I haven't amended it, but can someone with more extensive knowledge explain how one can have an amateur career? Tsuguya (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Laila Rouass controversy

He's an idiot for bringing up the terrorist joke. That's way too silly nowadays. I can't trust him now with the 'paki' word. On the other hand, i don't know the context of the situation. By itself, the paki incident actually seemed funny. But how did anyone find out about it? Did it happen on the set? I'm half east-indian, by the way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.202.2 (talk) 10:57, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

All the info about it has been removed. The article should say something about it, as it has gained a large amount of media coverage. Wiki editor 6 (talk) 19:09, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I have researched, written and added the section.KarlBattery (talk) 19:33, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Karl, I liked your section but wanted to qualify that the reports and background are the result of unnamed sources and ubiquitous witnesses. It gives reporting of the controversy some context. Since we are quoting sensationalist media rather than hard news, I think the main text of a wiki page should reflect that. Otherwise, wiki might be seen as propogating (some) unsubstantiated gossip. I think generally this has to appear in this page no question. If wiki is anything it is about education, and my personal belief is that this will educate a lot of people about a word that, like it or not, is still common parlance (see below).

My own experience, born into and growing up in a very working class background is that the word paki is used everyday parlance. People speak of going round to the 'paki shop' (my family included) and I can assure you, it was never used in an insulting context. It was a way of not saying a four syllabled word when you could say two. Being a young reader, and with a liking for current affairs I became aware that the term paki was actually offensive to pakistani's, but there are an awful lot of people in Britain who really do not grasp the gravitas or depth of the offense it can cause.

What I hope is that good may come out of this and it can, because an awful lot of the public will have been seriously awakened (as well as Anton Du Beke), to the fact that to many people of pakistani origin who help constitute a modern Britain, the term is not welcome. Responsiballot (talk) 11:25, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

KarlBattery, it would be good for you to discuss your rationale for changes in the controversy edit, when you make such a change. Wiki must be as truthful as possible, and present as much context, especially in controversial areas, such as accusations of racism.Responsiballot (talk) 12:48, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

This section of the article should state where and when the offending comments were spoken, and it should be stated that it was off-air. Wiki editor 6 (talk) 18:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)