Talk:David Boothroyd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

An individual covered in this article, David Boothroyd, has edited Wikipedia as Dbiv (talk • contribs).

This article was nominated for deletion on 2005-08-08. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article contains biographical material about a person who is or has been a Wikipedia contributor. Wikipedia policies are in place to ensure that the subject of such material does not exert undue influence over its content. However, the nature of Wikipedia is such that, as with all its articles, misleading material may be present. Readers are encouraged to review Wikipedia:Autobiography for information concerning autobiographical articles on Wikipedia.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class.

Contents 1 Rewrite 2 Sources 3 Possible conflict of interest 4 Vanity 5 Vanity 2 6 Denis Walker

[edit] Rewrite

For the reasons given in the VFD discussion, this article requires a complete rewrite, citing reliable sources. As it stands, this entire article only has the subject's own autobiography as its source. Uncle G 10:55:38, 2005-08-09 (UTC)

If it would assist I can offer directions to suitable reliable external sources where you can confirm the information. Actually I suspect that quite a few biographies in very reputable reference books come originally from their subjects: I certainly know of one false claim in the Oxford DNB which came from its subject, who was a friend. David | Talk 11:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Is the Wikipedia article in question right? (And I am disappointed if the ODNB does living subjects.) Septentrionalis 20:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

It's not the article I would have written and it's got a few judgment calls that I disagree with, but not so many as to go complaining about. The facts are all right. If there were an incorrect fact added then I would probably just remove it rather than "do a Siegenthaler". Oh, and the Oxford DNB doesn't do living subjects - I'm referring to a fact that the subject put in their autobiography which was published posthumously, and used as the basis for the DNB article. This particular subject doesn't have a Wikipedia article at the moment. David | Talk 20:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

• Full name, date and place of birth: My birth certificate has this on it. Full name is also confirmed by my matriculation records at Cambridge (see below).
• Educational history: My Friends Reunited entry shows the schools I went to. See also King's 1991, the yearbook of King's School Macclesfield, at page 26 for my class photo, and page 28 where you can see me in the (aborted) attempt at a full school photograph. For my position at Cambridge see the List of Members - any edition from that of 31 December 1991 includes me with the eventual line "BOOTHROYD David CTH BA 94 MA 98".
• Labour Party membership: The item which proves this is my first annual membership card showing it expires in 1990, and it has the same membership number as my current membership. I can fish out minutes from the Congleton Branch from 1989 showing me on the attendance list if anyone needs them.
• Working for John Battle: There is a briefing on the government's science budget which I co-authored with John Battle somewhere.
• Private Sector political researcher: Lots to prove this. I worked for Parliamentary Monitoring Services. Check the title page of the PMS Parliamentary Companion, a quarterly, and my name appears on it somewhere from 1995 to 2001. I also edited the second edition of the PMS Guide to Pressure Groups. The company is also named in my biography on my political parties book.
• Work for Ian Lucas: See the register of interests of Members' secretaries and research assistants published by Parliament - it shows I had a pass from 2002.
• Book publication: Well, it has an ISBN.
• Councillor: See 'London Borough Council Election Results' 1998 page 183 for an unsuccessful attempt and 2002 page 176 for success. See also Westminster Council's website.
• Current job: with Indigo Public Affairs Ltd.

Hope this helps. David | Talk 21:03, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Possible conflict of interest

It is unclear from the oage when he joined Indigo and whether he is still a councillor. I think this is a very important point considering his 'vociferous' campaign in an area in which he is now employed.

This is none of your business. Evidence that someone may have a POV outside Wikipedia is never evidence of POV editing on Wikipedia and everyone edits as an individual. Besides which, there's no conflict of interest involving Indigo which isn't mentioned once on Wikipedia. You're trying to slip a personal attack in under a very thin disguise. David | Talk 10:51, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I was simply trying to ascertain whether you were employed by Indigo at the same time as campainging on a planning matter, and whether you were a councillor when you campaigned on that issue. It is a perfectly sensible question. Also Indigo is mentioned on the wikipedia entry about you. I was simply trying to clear up an unclear point Dolive21 11:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

For your information, as an employee I am bound by the APPC code which prohibits a political consultant who is a councillor from working on any account involving the council of which they are a member. As a councillor I am bound by the Code of Conduct which prohibits me from participating in any council decision in which I have a prejudicial interest. I am therefore conflicted out on both sides. Indigo has no current clients in Westminster anyway. This has absolutely nothing to do with my Wikipedia editing. If I have been involved in a conflict of interest then it's a matter either for the APPC or for the Standards Board, not for someone who wants to jump up and make a personal attack on Wikipedia. Please try better next time. David | Talk 11:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying those points. I asked for the sake of clarity. I am, for the record, at this time satisfied that you have not acted in an improper way. I state this for clarity, and so any one viewing this at a later date can be completely clear that I do not believe that you acted improperly. This was never intended as a personal attack. I have just one more point I would ike clarified. Were you campaigning as a councillor or as a professional in the feild when you campaigned on the issue of the rainbow flag. Dolive21 11:34, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

That was as a local authority councillor. Other than buying things at their shop (a personal and non-prejudicial interest which I declared) I had no contact with Prowler until after the committee. After the committee voted to refuse their application I was acting as a councillor in campaigning for a change of policy by the council, in the interests of the people of Westminster. David | Talk 11:40, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I would like to thank you once again for being so helpful. As to your standard of conduct you have acted much better than some mayors (St. Albans for example).

[edit] Vanity

This is just a vanity article, pure and simple, by a left-wing activist. I though such things were banned? 81.131.3.115 19:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I didn't write the thing. I nominated it for deletion. The consensus was to keep it. David | Talk 20:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Anon, you might consider putting the article up for deletion on notability grounds but clearly not on vanity grounds, SqueakBox 20:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vanity 2

This site is pure self publicity, not worthy of Wikipeda Where does it state that someone is allowed to update their own profile? This is a Labour activist that wishes to become a Labour MP. Marked for deletion. Also it fails the notability position. Merely being a Cllr is no grounds for having a profile. Please create your own 'user' profile.

For the umpteenth time, I did not write the article, I nominated it for deletion. After consideration by other editors, it was decided that it was notable and was kept. If you want to overcome that, you've got to go to AfD again. The contention that I "wish to become a Labour MP" is not one that you can find a source for, it's just your assumption. I am removing the {{delete}} tag. David | Talk 13:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

The delete tag must be removed. Dont put it on again. Put an Afd on the article and don't put a lot of patronising comments towards David here as if you do so again I will remove them as a perosonal attack and one based on ignorance (ie David clearly doesn't want the article but has to live with it, which I think is fair enough all round), SqueakBox 14:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Clearly though, this is a self aggrandising article about someone not worthy of an entry at this stage.

[edit] Denis Walker

Denis Walker as a junior minister in the Rhodesian Government carried the appellation "The Honourable", just as British ministers carry "The Right Honourable". Please explain therefore why you have removed it. Sussexman 20:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

??? What has this got to do with this article? David Boothroyd has never been a minister and so clearly cannot be "The Honourable", SqueakBox 23:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I think Sussexman intended to place this message at User talk:Dbiv and came here in error. David | Talk 23:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't dismiss it too hastily... The Honourable David has a certain ring to it. ;-) -- ChrisO 00:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)