Talk:Peregrine Worsthorne

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
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This article says that Worsthorne obtained a "lower second class degree". As far as I know, neither Oxford nor Cambridge divided their seconds into upper and lower until the 1980s. Robma 10:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Worsthorne's degree classification is as stated in his autobiography. Philip Cross 07:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV tag

Much of the article isn't neutrally written, for instance

Despite his public school and Cambridge University experiences, Worsthorne had a long history of being critic of homosexual activity

what's that supposed to mean? There's a lot more. Can anyone more experienced clean it up?

Do we still need the NPOV notice? The tone of the article was a little odd at times but I can't see any obvious bias. As for the above comment, "Despite his public school and Cambridge University experiences" sounds less weird if you read the rest of the article and find out what his public school experiences were.--Lo2u 22:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

OK I'm going to remove this - it's been on for a few weeks without any discussion and I'm not exactly sure what the bias is supposed to be.--Lo2u 20:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Athenaeum Club speech

The split between the two references is awkward (in the "Recent Years" section), since the section keeps moving back and forward over a decade or so, contravening the style used for the rest of the article. Does this matter? The reference to Hitchens and Phillips seems either to read as being my POV or as something which might be developed in the article as a whole. Philip Cross 21:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that my insertion of this quotation was somewhat hastily done (and having read it again, I think it reads awfully), so I unequivocally support what changes exist between my edit and the most recent. In any case, I insist that this is an important point that deserves inclusion, particularly bearing in mind his traditional involvement with The Telegraph. I agree that the following reference being earlier is unfortunate, however. If anyone has the dates for the earlier quotes then we could say something vaguely along the lines of: 'He had earlier commented (IN...) that...'. The problem is, at least the first link no longer works, so has anyone got the dates? garik 00:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)