Talk:Tom Boardman, Baron Boardman

This 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

	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 (assessed as Low-importance).

Gazette hits

Searching by service number David Underdown (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concern over WP:NPOV

While this article is certainly well sourced, I worry about WP:NPOV especially in light of COI concerns around one of the editor's connections to the subject. The article seems overly fawning of the subject (for example "showed his steel", "Boardman was a politician of charm and ability", "noted for his loyalty and for the meticulousness" "well-liked and respected" etc). Some of this praise comes from good sources, but should be presented in context as an opinion in a source not a statement of fact. The WP:NPOV is probably best represented by how the article draws greatly upon praise from right (or economically liberal) leaning publications like The Daily Telegraph The Times and The Independent. An alternate view, like that put forward by The Guardian, is pretty absent. The Guardian obituary is quite forthright in its assessment - comparing Boardman's views on immigration to Enoch Powell. I'm probably not the right person to start tinkering with a biography of a political figure and would appreciate assistance. Calling on other editors for help with this. Vladimir.copic (talk) 06:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I dimly remember that Tom Boardman could be controversial even when he was alive, but I've no idea why. For what it's worth, I too find the tone of some of those silken obituary phrases you quote a tad unencyclopedic, but presuambly (almost) everyone can be described as "well-liked" by ... someone, if it says so in "The Independent". Or?

There's no wiki-law that I know of precluding the simple sentence "Opinions differ". If you want to contribute (1) a more objective version of something or (2) an equally subjective but different version of something that you find in the entry, you should do so. Provided your contribution is (1) not overtly batty and (2) plausibly sourced, you will be doing us all a favour. Be well Charles01 (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]