Talk:An Interview with HRH The Princess of Wales

BBC Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

British Royalty Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Discredited/Controversial?

In light of recent developments, I would suggest that the word "discredited" is used in the lede to describe the interview. I made this change, but it was deleted, and instead the sentence structure altered. I have changed this to a more muted 'controversial', but this description is likely to be construed as referring to the interview itself, and not the manner in which it was arranged by Bashir; the whole point of the word "discredited". Any views welcome. Hanoi Road (talk) 01:00, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think "discredited" is a pretty strong word, since the primary thing under dispute was the circumstances of how the interview was obtained, and how that affected the narrative of the episode and personal life of the princess, but the lead does currently state that Bashir was guilty of deceit, despite the initial acclaim the interview garnered.--Bettydaisies (talk) 07:32, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the general view, then OK. However, I do think Bashir's deceit should be signposted in the opening sentence. This interview would almost certainly never have taken place were it not for his deceptions. Everything, including the content of the meeting, leads back to this. Hanoi Road (talk) 13:53, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the whole second paragraph in the lede covers Bashir's deceit. I think it's better to keep the chronological order, starting with the date and content of the interview which is covered in the first paragraph, and then move to the issue of deceit which is included in the second one. Also, even though the way the interview was secured was deceitful, according to the investigation Diana was planning on to be interviewed anyway and the content might or might not have been the same. It is not really up to us to discredit what she said because we don't know to what degree the narrative of another potential interview could be different from this one. Keivan.f^Talk 02:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

James Gilbey

"Diana confirmed the accuracy of the Squidgygate tapes of a telephone conversation she had with James Gilbey", is this link true? That is, same James Gilbey, whose article is linked here, or namesake? In the article is no mention of him being heir to Gilbey's Gin. BirgittaMTh (talk) 09:39, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]