Talk:Simon Jenkins

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

[Untitled][edit]

I think Sir Simon's relationship with EH is now historic.

Career section[edit]

[I didn't contribute the above]. This article would look a lot more professional if the Career section was written from more of a NPOV. I might get round to fixing that sometime. --GuillaumeTell 00:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Reformatting[edit]

This page needs reformatting ... shame. Peoples be checkin it out.

Unsourced association[edit]

What on earth is his connection to SDC/University of Wales Lampeter?--194.80.178.253 (talk) 16:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Corrections and clarifications. Not a trivia board[edit]

If this material, which has just been restored to the page, is so interesting/significant, then please find a reliable third-party source that has noted this or commented on it. There is no need for the pages on commentators and journalists to highlight each time something they once wrote in passing in the middle of one of their articles has been corrected or clarified. N-HH talk/edits 14:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for you note and I can see where you are coming from. Personally I disagree with your deletion, but that is ok and is what WP is about. I have written at length about Jenkins innocent mistake at Talk:Anti-Polish sentiment. In short, in this case, Jenkins the historian made the mistake of believing and repeating a specific and well documented meme of Nazi propaganda, on the 70th anniversary of the start of WW2, while writing about historical myths. That is verifiable from secondary sources, and I`m not certain that third-party comment is required if WP:CONSENSUS is happy with inclusion. Ways to find consensus are of course to file a WP:3O and WP:RFC and to get comment from WP:MILHIST, WP:POLAND and elsewhere. Let`s try it. Thanks, -Chumchum7 (talk) 15:31, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Here is one ref to this affair, on a blog http://blog.timelines.com/page/2/ - But WP:SELFPUBLISH doesn`t like blogs. -Chumchum7 (talk) 16:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
There's no doubt his column contained the comment, and that the Guardian corrected it, and that people, like yourself and the odd blogger, are aware of it. The issue is really how significant this is in the grand scheme of things. What I was more thinking of is some substantive reaction - for example, with the Zuma issue, the Guardian was actually sued by the man who is now South African president. Other papers reported on that controversy. In my view, even that probably isn't worth mentioning, but a much stronger case can be made in that instance, at least, which is why I reluctantly left it in. Jenkins has been in journalism for decades, and has written hundreds of columns on hundreds of topics. The Guardian has published thousands of corrections to its articles over the years. You have to draw a line somewhere as to which of those get highlighted. N-HH talk/edits 18:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree that recent issues shouldn`t dominate WP content. I accept Jenkins has written hundreds of articles across decades. I agree that newspaper mistakes and corrections happen every day. But that blogger, myself, and I suspect a large number of editors will see this as noteworthy. I have to ask, how many times has Jenkins referred to the most heroic and idiotic act of modern war" ? He is rather emphatic here, putting this alleged cavalry charge at the top of his list. How many times has he mentioned his belief that something is the most `anything` of modern war? And how many times has he unwittingly propagated Nazi propaganda in this way? He is a knighted historian after all, and when a knighted historian says something is the most X in history, and that sentiment turns out to be a Nazi slur, it seems of note to me, to a blogger and possibly others. We should put it to WP:MILHIST, I think. I`ll follow consensus. -Chumchum7 (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

On universities...[edit]

[1] -- why does this guy hate universities so much? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 09:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Good question, Nomoskedasticity, and it has been such a recurring and long-standing theme in his writing that it deserves a dispassionate reference in the article. However, I am not the person to write it (because I would not be able to be dispassionate), and, indeed, it would not be easy for anyone knowledgeable about higher education to report Jenkins' views calmly.Gordoncph (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Another burst of anti-university writing in his Guardian column [2], described as "bile" by many of the bloggers, but, again, I am too angry to write the dispassionate entry on this subject that the article needs. Why, indeed, does this guy hate universities so much? Gordoncph (talk) 06:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Simon Jenkins. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Simon Jenkins. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:06, 8 November 2017 (UTC)