Talk:Chas Newkey-Burden

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 June 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

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 article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Journalism

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Writing a biography of Paris Hilton and a few freelance pieces don't seem sufficient to warrant a Wiki entry. Certainly not one where the subject admits writing it himself. Going to flag this for deletion to see what people more expert think. It at least needs to be made into less of a press release. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.177.183 (talk) 12:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm new on wikipedia. This page is transparently a piece of self-promotion by a professional freelance journalist - if that is fine in Wikipedia then OK. Checking the history of the page it is obvious that the subject (witness the stalking comments) themself - and latterly, the subject's publishing company (Virgin) - has continualy alterered the page to make it favourable to the subject rather than reflecting the truth or allowing dissenting views on the subject's worth as a journalist/writer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TibbertonUnited (talk • contribs) 19:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Newkey-Burden in Private Eye

From Private Eye, No 1217, 22 Aug - 4 Sept 2008:

"More on Chas Newkey-Burden, the hack author turned latest best friend of Julie Burchill whom the Eye pointed out last month had been posting enthusiastic reviews of his own books on the Amazon website (see Eye 1214).

Repeated attempts by Eye readers to update Newkey-Burden's self-penned entry on that other great "free-contribution" website, Wikipedia, in the light of the Eye's revelations, were thwarted by a contributor calling themsleves "Virgin 711".

When challenged, Virgin 711 - whose contributions to the website are limited to the entries on Newkey-Burden and a number of other authors published by Virgin Books - announced that "I believe Private Eye has retracted their allegations now and apologised to CNB. It's against wikipedia's rules to add original research into articles so I haven't added that information (it hasn't been published) but just so you know."

As a service to Wikipedia editors, let it here be recorded in print: have we heck. "

I reverted to deletion on this page of people's comments. Note to the editors involved: you don't delete other people's comments. You can comment on them, by all means, but leave them be.86.133.215.234 (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, can this be put to bed now? I've reworded the section to be a little more neutral (though "reported" is absolutely the right word to use here) and added citations in the correct format. The only issue you might have now is if other editors feel that mentioning this is giving undue weight to the story. Maybe ask at WP:BLP. All the best, Steve ^{T • C} 08:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I ran this journalists name through lexis Nexis just now: it found one item written by him for Guardian Unlimited! I suggest deleting the refs to specific publications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.153.17 (talk) 09:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chas Newkey-Burden. 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) 18:45, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]