Talk:Jamie Spencer-Churchill, Marquess of Blandford
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
[edit] "disapproved of his lifestyle"
Can anyone explain what this phrase means in terms of why he was disinherited by his father? "Lifestyle" is often a discreet code word for homosexuality, but since Jamie has had two wives and several children, this seems unlikely. --Jfruh (talk) 20:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- Why is everything on wikipedia about homosexuality all of a sudden!? Durgs &c. is a more reasonable answer. He has not yet been disinherited. --Counter-revolutionary 20:32, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not responsible for "everything" on WIkipedia, I'm just speculating based on the common use of this word when airily bandied about by posh types in a vaguely disapproving way. The extremely vaguely worded sentence invites just this sort of speculation (whether it's about his sexual orientation, or drug use or what have you). A look at the reference reveals that the reference is to his financial extravagence ... according to something posted to an e-mail discussion list, the authority of which (and the authority of the poster Sandra Lovegrove) is more or less impossible for the average reader to determine. This should either be clarified with real sources or removed altogether. --Jfruh (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, sorry, but homosexual content seems to being added to a lot of articles of late. You're correct it, no doubt, needs clarified, if not removed as un-encyclopedic. --Counter-revolutionary 20:48, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not responsible for "everything" on WIkipedia, I'm just speculating based on the common use of this word when airily bandied about by posh types in a vaguely disapproving way. The extremely vaguely worded sentence invites just this sort of speculation (whether it's about his sexual orientation, or drug use or what have you). A look at the reference reveals that the reference is to his financial extravagence ... according to something posted to an e-mail discussion list, the authority of which (and the authority of the poster Sandra Lovegrove) is more or less impossible for the average reader to determine. This should either be clarified with real sources or removed altogether. --Jfruh (talk) 20:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
