Talk:Hilary Benn
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hilary Benn article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Hilary Benn was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 15, 2019). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
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. |
![]() | This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Viscount Stansgate
Will Hilary become the 3rd Viscount (and if he renounces it in turn how will the numbering go if it is subsequently taken up)? Jackiespeel 17:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC) The Viscount Stansgate article says it will be his elder brother Stephen 84.9.160.252 13:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
The question still applies - though a redirect to the relevant page on succession of titles and comment thereon would probably be more appropriate.
See the comment on Tony Benn and talk page - a comment here on Hilary as a fourth generation politician? Jackiespeel 16:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Dynasties
Can anyone recall another example of a three-generation Cabinet dynasty in the House of Commons? The Peels perhaps? Adam 05:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Deputy Leadership race
Deleted the prediction that party members would vote in the same pattern as CLPs nominated candidates. It's possible they will, but it's just speculation at this stage.Ajwells 13:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
"Benn was top on 27%, followed by Education Secretary Alan Johnson on 18%, Environment Secretary David Miliband on 17%"
David Milliband did not run for the labour deputy leadership. Could someone find out the right numbers and names and correct this? I can't remember... But I can assure you David Milliband did not run for it ;p —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.189.228 (talk) 00:56, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- The reference is to an opinion poll conducted before the contest formally began, at which time the final candidates weren't known, hence Miliband's inclusion. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Wikisource
Wikisource has never heard of the guy 83.70.247.123 19:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Next generation
It appears that Hilary's niece/Tony's granddaughter #may# get involved in politics. Are there any such examples of five generations of politicians involving peers (excluding 'Hereditary Position X' types)? Jackiespeel (talk) 17:47, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- The Walpoles were a fairly extensive dynasty. A few of the members of parliament from their family were:
- Robert Walpole (1650-1700)
- Robert Walpole (Prime Minister & son of Robert)
- Horace Walpole, 4th Earl of Orford (son of the Prime Minister)
- Edward Walpole (son of the Prime Minister)
- Horatio Walpole, 1st Baron Walpole (brother of the Prime Minister)
- Horatio Walpole, 1st Earl of Orford (eldest son of 1st Baron Walpole)
- Horatio Walpole, 2nd Earl of Orford (son of Horatio, 1st Earl)
- John Walpole (son of Horatio, 2nd Earl)
- George Walpole (grandson of 1st Baron Walpole)
- Before the removal of the rotten boroughs, it was quite common for political dynasties to pass parliamentary seats between family members. Road Wizard (talk) 19:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- There were at least five successive generations of Churchills active in politics beyond membership of the Lords:
- John Spencer-Churchill, 7th Duke of Marlborough - Cabinet minister under Disraeli
- Lord Randolph Churchill - his son, major Conservative politician in the 1880s
- Winston Churchill - his son, no introduction needed
- Randolph Churchill - his son, an MP during the Second World War but otherwise a rather unsuccessful career
- Winston Churchill (born 1940) - his son, an MP 1970-1997 but never achieving prominence
- Also other members have been active including Nicholas Soames, grandson of the most famous Winston, whilst several earlier generations of both the Churchill and Spencer families were also much involved. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- There were at least five successive generations of Churchills active in politics beyond membership of the Lords:
Assessment comment
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Hilary Benn/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section..
|
Last edited at 10:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 17:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Hilary Benn. 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:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scribd.com/doc/207917124/Keeping-it-in-the-Family
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3023827.stm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.casinotimes.co.uk/casino-news/2007-02/william-hill-labour-170207.htm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/312
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6658307.stm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6663653.stm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/08/mps-expenses-hilary-benn-ed-miliband
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/nov/09/labour.hilarybenn
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150520125406/http://www.grassrootdiplomat.org/whoswho/ to http://www.grassrootdiplomat.org/whoswho/
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/about/who/ministers/benn.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110524115613/http://www.gleeds.tv/index.cfm?video=589 to http://www.gleeds.tv/index.cfm?video=589
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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) 10:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Hilary Benn/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: AlastairJHannaford (talk · contribs) 14:40, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | There is a litany of spelling and grammatical issues, making it hard to read and detracting from the content. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | On the lead section, it could be shortened to give it greater impact on the reader, as there is some repetition within it. The second paragraph must be re-worked as to be grammatically correct. The third paragraph could be rephrased to allow for it to read with greater ease. Though not major, the title of the first section (Labour in government) on its own is grammatically poor, and also lacks flow in reading. The last sentence of the second paragraph (referring to Benn's constituency office) should be rephrased to read better. |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | This is the case. |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Everything is in order. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | I believe this to be the case, as everything appears to be accurately cited. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | I believe this to be the case, as everything appears to be accurately cited and in order. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | This is an entry on a British politician, and his political views had been summed up as "Benn supports the maintenance of a nuclear-armed strategic force by the United Kingdom." While they have been added to, the impression that this article is incomplete still remains. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | The article is to the point. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | It is written in a neutral manner. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | It is stable. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All are in order. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | This is the case. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | I am of the view, that while an effort was made to improve the article it still falls short of the criteria. |