Talk:Fiona Fox (UK press officer)

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]

[edit] Libellous links?

This link was removed as "potentially libellous", by User:SimonLevey, who happens to be on Fiona Fox's staff (see staff profiles in the article, he's SMC's "Fundraising and Administrative Assistant"):

GMWatch profile

If I'd wanted to hide the fact I work with Fiona I wouldn't have used my real name, CPMcE. --SimonLevey 12:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Fine, I wasn't suggesting you were trying to hide that fact, though neither did you disclose it. It's just that when someone who works with the subject of an article removes information which may be critical of the person, it seems natural that one would want to investigate. I have no particular axe to grind on the subject of Ms. Fox, and merely created the original stub as I saw her mentioned in various other articles. I offer no opinion on GMWatch, though I believe that even "very minority" views deserve to be aired.Camillus (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Just for clarification, although I know that WP must avoid making "potentially libellous" accusations, does this also mean that we can't link to external, established sites which may be critical of people featured in articles?

I think we should be keen to keep it to a minimum, especially as this is a very minority opinion portrayed on the external site. --SimonLevey 12:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I would contend that it was at the bare minimum, only a link. Who decides what constitutes "minority view", and don't "minority views" have the right to be aired anyway? Camillus (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

And I refer you to the articles on libel and reliable sources. --SimonLevey 16:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

This link was also removed, an article written by Fiona Fox when she was involved with Living Marxism, for which she was well known:

"Massacring the truth in Rwanda"

as was the reference to here being involved in Living Marxism, which is surely pertenent.

Not particularly, the issue is a very old one, in which Fiona is no longer involved. It was written as part of a much larger debate on a controversial issue of the time (not represented here) and is not relevant in the grand scheme of her biog entry. --SimonLevey 12:58, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not even relevant that Ms. Fox was a former supporter of Living Marxism/the Revolutionary Communist Party? Who decides? Camillus (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Only as relevant as to whether she's a former teen-Rod Stewart fan or not.--SimonLevey 16:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

How utterly ridiculous, Simon. Fiona Fox wrote many articles for LM magazine, some of which created a lot of controversy in the newspapers such as the Guardian, and amongst agencies dealing in Rwanda etc. I'm afraid this disgracefully flippant comment has now disqualified in you in my eyes as someone who can be trusted to see that an objective view can be assured in this article. I will be re-adding some relevant data regarding Ms. Fox's 7-year relationship with Living Marxism and the RCP, and will seek a Request for Comment if you continue to censor this article of information inconvenient to your boss. Camillus (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)