Talk:Philip Stanhope, 4th Earl of Chesterfield

This level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Biography: Peerage and Baronetage / Royalty and Nobility

	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 is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

NPOV

To say of Chesterfield that he 'was selfish, calculating and contemptuous; he was not naturally generous, and he practised dissimulation until it became part of his nature' is an extraordinarily one-sided way to begin an analysis of his character. It reflects a moralistic C19th indictment of Chesterfield (following Cowper + Dr Johnson). He had a bastard son and (unlike so many others) he wasn't a hypocrit about it. More balance needed!! --OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 11:00, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tone

To add to the comment above, the article is full of sections like these:

The Letters are brilliantly written, full of elegant wisdom, of keen wit, of admirable portrait-painting, of exquisite observation and deduction.

These and other inappropriate value judgements appear to be remnants of its original source (Britannica). Although well-written, the tone doesn't match Wikipedia and is anything but neutral.

Lacking an account I'm hesitant to go in with simple removal of objectionable phrases like these (reverts are just around the corner), so I'll just have to be lazy and point it out. 31.169.57.1 (talk) 13:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More Dr Johnson re Lord Chesterfield

Johnson could often contradict himself. On one occasion he said this of Lord Chesterfield's letters. "Lord Chesterfield's Letters to his son would make a very pretty book. Take out the immorality and it should be put in the hands of every young gentleman." From Boswell's "Life of Dr. Johnson", pp.36, 1949 edition, for the year 1776. 47.232.145.208 (talk) 16:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]