Talk:Mark Lancaster, Baron Lancaster of Kimbolton

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Buckinghamshire, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BuckinghamshireWikipedia:WikiProject BuckinghamshireTemplate:WikiProject BuckinghamshireBuckinghamshire articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

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.

Biography: Politics and Government Stub‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Politics of the United Kingdom Unassessed Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article should be moved to John_Mark_Lancaster to make it more correct given that it is his birthname Froo.au (talk) 12:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We use the common recognizable name for article titles, so it's correct here. Severo^TC 14:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-warring and three revert rule violations

User:Bbcbbcdddddd and User:Bastin are engaged in an edit war with very terse explations for their reasons in doing so. Would they please use this space to justify their positions so that other users can comment and hopefully reach consensus. Immediately and before any other edits to the article, would they each review the Wikipedia policies WP:Bio and WP:3RR. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's rules are subject to numerous instances of breach that amount to character assassination. Witness:

My deletion of sections are deleted per WP:BLP. If you disagree, WP:CITE. You are required to follow the rules under WP:CITE to protect Wikipedia from accusations of both impartiality and libel. Please respect policy.
The change back to an illegitimate version was performed without justification.
The change back to an illegitimate version was performed by a user without ANY edits that aren't related to Mark Lancaster.

I put it that the rules of Wikipedia have been put somewhat aside in the interest of character assassination. This so-called 'edit war' seems quite easy to resolve. Bastin 02:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The material on Mark Lancaster was taken from newspaper & web sources, as you can easily check. There is no character assassination involved, just citing of things that Mark Lancaster has done. Although I thought I'd cited everything adequately, I have put in the extra citations you wanted.Mphammer (talk) 18:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war is continuing, a new user has been removing all negative content from the article. I restored it the first time, but it looks like it may violate NPOV as half of the article was about the expenses scandal. Another user has restored the sections; I think the information should stay but it probably needs to be rewritten. I've removed the personal life section as the only source cited is a tabloid (the Daily Mirror), and controversial material such as this needs multiple reliable sources. snigbrook (talk) 12:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think 'Springbrook' should read more newspapers. The Personal life section is accurate. Maybe he should take some time to do some proper research - and also not slate tabloid newspapers in such a way.

The problem is that it is disputed, and would need more sources even if the Daily Mirror was a reliable source. Maybe some research is needed, but content that violates the biographies of living persons policy should be removed immediately, instead of waiting until better sources can be found. snigbrook (talk) 12:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I always thought Wikipedia was for relevant information only. Therefore character assassination, personal deformation etc should not be included. Do onto others as you would have others do onto you and all.

The article was biased (I noticed this after I reverted the first edits you made to the article), however some of the controversy is verifiable and should be mentioned in the article if there is enough relevant coverage in reliable sources – it looked like it was properly sourced before, but some of the sources cited in the article didn't mention Mark Lancaster, so probably shouldn't be used. snigbrook (talk) 13:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unbiased eyes

I don't know the first thing about UK politics, except that you are still a backwater Monarchy or something, being Yankee scum, myself. I've shrunk the section in a way similar to how I'd do the same to a US politician - if the scandal was unique to the individual, or was highly linked to the individual, it should be mentioned in the article about the indiviudal, otherwise it's appropriate for a more general article. If I removed too much, or too little, I welcome you Royalists telling me about how your angry-yelling political system works, and why some other info should/should not be included. Hipocrite (talk) 14:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The United Kingdom Parliamentary expenses scandal was a major scandal; MPs generally were criticised, and some were specifically mentioned but it doesn't look like Mark Lancaster was one of them. The "personal life" section was also disputed (although it's been removed now) – I don't think the one source cited is enough, as it has been suggested by Fatzulu that it is biased and doesn't tell the full story (also there are slight contradictions in different sources I can find). snigbrook (talk) 18:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous to say that Lancaster was implicated in the British Council row which was all about not declaring trips as Lancaster clearly declared his trip the day he returned with the electoral commission as can be seen on their website www.electoralcommission.com

Protection

For edit warring and biography of living persons concerns, this page is semi-protected for one week. Other admins are free to modify, extend, or shorten this as appropriate. Jonathunder (talk) 19:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]