Jump to content

Talk:The Union MMU

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Controversy

[edit]

For some reason someone seems intent on regurgitating the same story about Ramsbottom, as if it was the single most important controversial event in the history of the Union. Ramsbottom left his post of General Manager by mutual consent. No evidence has been made public to support the allegations. Why does whoever keeps referring to the initial story never say that?

The Union has been involved with significant controversy in the past which has never been referred to: the loans to Bold/NUM during the 1983/4 Miners strike which were investigation by Government and could have ended with it having all it assets sequestrated and put into receivership, and its officers jailed, for example. Or the allegations of extreme left wing infiltration and monitoring by the security services during the same period. Or the fact that at least one other General Manager who was a local councillor left by "mutual consent". Or that other members of staff have been invited to leave for alleged financial impropriety. Or that at one time the Union could not produce accounts for 18 months and was technically bankrupt. Or the controversy over continuing to call the Union building after Winnie Mandela after she was implicated in the death of Stompie Makesi. Or the frankly more amusing story of trying to change the name of the Union to the Bruce Forsyth building, causing national press interest and the joke that it was the only Student Union building in the country which had a thatched roof?

So someone running half a story, completely without context, and no mention of the denouement, either indicates that the author comes from a particular point of view, and no doubt a political one, or they are completely ignorant of the "controversial" history of the Union, in which case they should not attempt to contribute to the article.

Either do the history job properly or concentrate on what the Union is doing now, otherwise the article does not deserve to survive the next attempt at deletion. Mithrandir1967 (talk) 17:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've got no issue that the information is incomplete, or even possibly irrelevant, and I don't know who posted or re-posted the info (save for a bot that I use that thought an edit by you was vandalism); however this was a referenced source and as such was valid information. Whether or not Ramsbottom left by "mutual consent", as you put it, is not verifiable as there are no sources available. I certainly don't know if he resigned, was dismissed, or otherwise. You go on to talk about the history of the union. Why don't you edit the article to reflect this history? I would welcome any information on the subject. In particular, the union's support for the miners strike is an important part of the union's history, but I have very limited knowledge to be searching for sources on the Internet and elsewhere. Please don't hesitate to contribute, your input is very welcome. Andy (talk) 23:49, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Union MMU. 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) 02:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Union_MMU&oldid=1205830413"