Jump to content

Talk:Bernard Jenkin

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

Untitled

[edit]

This is in desperate need of an update! He's no longer in Opposition. I've not got time to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.241.227.84 (talk) 08:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bernard Jenkin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is bernard Jenkin a naturist

[edit]

The Guardian and the BBC claim he is. Should this information be included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heliotom (talkcontribs) 06:29, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no sensible discussion to be had, because your intention is clearly to revert and pester, and not to improve articles. You clearly did not care what the content of the article was, so pretending to now is highly unconvincing. If you genuinely wish to improve articles, then apologise for reverting four times in half an hour and making flagrantly false accusations of vandalism against me, and demonstrate that you understand article content policies. 80% of your week-long editing history being reverts or template messages does not persuade. 69.176.70.106 (talk) 16:28, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"correct term"

[edit]

Shortly after returning to the back benches, he used racial descriptor "coloured" (rather than the correct term, "person of colour")

Who says this is the "correct term"? Constant Pedant (talk) 12:25, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]