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 sourcedmust 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.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.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 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England 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.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related
Note: These articles may overlap with those on other related lists. If you would like to make a change, either do so yourself, or make a suggestion.
A fact from Helen Grant (politician) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 May 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
I've just finished making several changes to the article from this version which rather read like it was there to promote Helen Grant rather than inform readers about her in neutral fashion. For edxample, revelations about her membership of Labour were not a smear campaign - merely reporting of fact. And why do we need to state that she didn't vote or campaign for Labour? I've also removed the information about the number of clients and employees that Grants Solicitors has. This is an article about Grant rather than her legal practice, and much of the information added wasn't in the Guardian ref anyway. If she should become prime minister one day then I'm sure we'll have an article about Grants Solicitors, and probably even the Raffles estate, but that's all for the future. TheRetroGuy (talk) 12:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Have started an article about Raffles as the area seems large enough to merit one. Haven't found much up to date information yet though. In 1994 the estate seemed to be troubled by crime, but not sure whether that has changed. Anyway, hopefully someone can update it. TheRetroGuy (talk) 13:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to WP:Suggested sources one should "generally avoid British tabloids such as the Daily Mail, Daily Express, The Mirror and The Sun."
According to WP:BLPSOURCES, Material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism. When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources. JRPG (talk) 15:55, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I amended "She said in a 2008 interview with the Daily Mail that as the only black resident of the estate she was the victim of racist bullying" as this connects two separate statements made in the interview in a manner that the source does not, and is therefore WP:SYNTH. I think it's clear from the statement " "I really wasn't keen on school playtime, as that was where the trouble would be," she says. "I admit I got involved in fights and was dragged before the headmaster" " that the bullying occurred at school, not on her estate. January (talk) 18:26, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Support: Traffic indicates people are much more often looking for the politician article, so it appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. (That's not always a certain thing; there can be brief spikes in popularity of a topic. But a political election that was over 8 years ago is probably not such a spike.) — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 15:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. A clear primary topic. The other two can be added directly to the hatnote, so no reader is inconvenienced. Station1 (talk) 21:15, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The politician received sustained coverage over several years, whereas the other two homonyms had fleeting event-based recognition. — JFGtalk22:10, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The politician is certainly newsier in the present day, which is why she dominates the current pageview stats, but it is not at all clear that she has permanently eclipsed the other two as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in perpetuity — if and when she's no longer in office, her pageview stats are likely to subside considerably. The other two may not be as currently visible as the politician, but their notability was neither "fleeting" nor "event-based" — there's a field hockey player whose notability extended over seven years of major league play, and an author whose article simply hasn't been updated recently to note that she has published six novels as of 2018 and not just two. These are not minor footnotes to history we're talking about here; they're genuinely notable even if they're not currently as newsy. Bearcat (talk) 19:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
.svg){kind=small}
