Jump to content

Talk:Hugh Gaitskell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 92.7.25.225 (talk) at 15:21, 28 November 2012 (→‎Suez: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconUniversity of Oxford Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
WikiProject iconPolitics of the United Kingdom Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
More information:
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
WikiProject iconBiography: Politics and Government Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).
WikiProject iconSocialism Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Non-neutral suppression of family background

I am going to add a POV tag to the Early Life section. Articles about Labour politicians from working class backgrounds routinely go into detail about the humble occupations and allegedly desperate lives of the subject's parents, but in this case, the parents are not even mentioned. Why? Presumably because, as Gaitskell's educational history suggests, they were upper middle class, and therefore non-people from a socialist perspective. This politically biased suppression of facts is not in line with wikipedia's neutrality policy. Choalbaton (talk) 17:35, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, geez. Just add something about them. Far more productive than adding some lame POV notice. You can surely pick up a biography about him from somewhere to get the details. Less of the pompous whining about politically biased blah, blah, blah would be appreciated too. -- Derek Ross | Talk 05:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added some info on his early life, and have to say that Choalbaton is right. Biographies of Labour politicians are often biased that way. Atchom 01:12, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but you fixed it the right way. Choalbaton didn't. Thanks. -- Derek Ross | Talk 18:15, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suez

Gaitskell's true opinion on the Suez affair remains a matter of debate, as both Eden and Macmillan said he had agreed to support military intervention on 26th July 1956 when news of the canal's seizure reached London. Whether this is true, and whether Gaitskell changed his mind in the following days and weeks, cannot be proved either way. (92.7.25.225 (talk) 15:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]