Jump to content

Talk:Brian Sewell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is Brian Sewell really gay?

[edit]

According to the television review quoted (Alison Graham, 'How Gay Sex Changed the World', Radio Times), Brian Sewell is gay. In his Naked Pilgrim and Grand Tour programmes he has always portrayed himself as taking an interest in women. Is it possible that this revelation is a hoax, either by him or by the people responsible for the programme? Or has he been carefully disguising his homosexuality until recently?--Oxonian2006 15:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm watching a programme on gay sex right now where he's talking about being gay in the 70s. I think he's probably gay. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
He has recently confirmed that he is homosexual. However it was something of an open secret for some time, he has implied in the past that he was in love with a male art tutor in his youth, and some of the stuff he has written over the years seemed to indicate an attraction to men. However he certainly seems to have an interest in women also, he has described losing his virginity as a young man to a Parisian woman several decades his senior and has made clear over the years that he is attracted to women. Despite the fact that he has called himself gay recently, I suspect he is actually bisexual, though he may well be more attracted to men. MarkB79 00:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, he's gay, but is this in line with WP:BLP? --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 20:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As he's taken part in BBC programmes discussing being gay, the information is verifiable and cannot be considered sensationalist. The sources quoted address the guidance of WP:BLP. Ashleyvh (talk) 09:19, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He has had at least one woman in the past, but is now an out homosexual. F W Nietzsche (talk) 06:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I (male) was invited back for tea in about 1985 to his house in Kensington where he lived on his own except for a beautiful young (male) Thai housekeeper(?). I don't think there is any doubt he is homosexual, as was Blunt of course. 79.65.110.155 (talk) 14:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

and Cecil Gould 81.147.149.174 (talk) 17:30, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Year of birth

[edit]

At the time of the making of The Naked Pilgrim Brian Sewell was 72. Presumably he was born around 1932.

This page - <blacklisted link removed> says he was born on St Swithin's Day (July 15), 1931. It also says he was born in Kensington (London), not Yorkshire. 143.252.80.110 15:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In which case he could not be Peter Warlock's son. I am surprised that his claim to be the composers son is treated as fact, without further comment. There seems to be no evidence to support the claim, and, given Sewell's general unreliability when it comes to his personal life, must be doubted.203.184.41.226 (talk) 06:30, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the fact that he was born in London mean that he could not be Warlock's son? It was his mother, not Warlock, who gave birth. I believe the reference to him being born in Market Bosworth was wrong - see further discussion below. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:55, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mother, Where Art Thou?

[edit]

"The illegitimate son of the composer Peter Warlock,"

As mentioned in another section, that is an interesting, but unsourced and unsubstantiated claim.

Similarly interesting is the absence of reference to his mother. Presumably he had one. Was she insignificant? Embarrassing? A sort of inverted reincarnation of the Blessed Virgin Mary? Or is it that women are relatively unimportant in this article about an Important Man? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.148.210 (talk) 17:36, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I jave just made a clean sweep of all the external links. The find-an-article one no longer does anything but spew up pop-up ads. The "interview" comes off one of the satirical sites, and the satirical sites are.. well, just odd. They all link to each other and to a couple of other sites which are all owned by the same person. I don't think they add anything to the article. Telsa (talk) 17:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Homosexual

[edit]

The amount of confusion here is astonishing. Exclusive attraction to men makes one 'homosexual'. Exclusive to women makes one 'heterosexual'. Attraction to both sexes makes one 'bisexual'.

If he's had vocal relationships and interests with women in the past (and not), but he has since a certain point had those with men as well- that makes him bisexual. The Squicks (talk) 07:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original research. It would appear he was in the closet and then came out as gay. That's what his own sources say.~ZytheTalk to me! 14:40, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coronation Street

[edit]

Took out bit about his love of Coronation street as feel it is very inaccurate, unless the article has been edited since that was added to wiki, it is not particularly gay friendly http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2011651/Coronation-Street-Wall-wall-gays-transsexuals-transvestites-lesbians.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.176.161 (talk) 14:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orwell prize

[edit]

"In April 2003, he was awarded the George Orwell Prize for his political/current affairs column in the Evening Standard."

I think that the article should give details on what Sewell did to win this prize. I didn't realise that he gave any opinions on current affairs/politics beyond what relates to art galleries. Epa101 (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a mistake given the commendation on the Orwell Prize website. Philip Cross (talk) 22:14, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This section of the website suggests that he won the journalism award in 2003. This is to award specifically political writing, which is not what I associate Sewell with. I've had a look in the Evening Standard's archives and it seems that he was more political around this period. Once I've read more of these articles, I might edit the Wikipedia entry appropriately. Epa101 (talk) 21:26, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Place of birth

[edit]

This reliable obituary says he was born in London. I think that the mention of him being born in Market Bosworth is simply wrong, and should be removed. It arose from this edit in 2014, which also added a middle initial. There was indeed a Brian R. Sewell born in Market Bosworth in 1931, but I am 100% sure that was a different person - official records (which I can access via Ancestry.com, I'm sure other sources are available) show that that person died as a baby the same year. So, I will change the reference to his birthplace, per the Telegraph obituary. If anyone wants to challenge that (on the basis of offline sources if necessary), please discuss it here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PS: It's true that many obits do give his birthplace as Market Bosworth - which is interesting, but they may well have got their information from here. If people want to add a footnote to the effect that different sources give different information, so be it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:04, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It seems likely that the following is his birth: http://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVQQ-Y5GH His mother married Mr Sewell in Hammersmith RD in 1936. If so there are 3 middle initials given. Nigej (talk) 07:53, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. It seems plausible. So, his birth name was Perkins. More investigation (WP:NOR) needed.... Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:59, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mother died in 1995 it seems: http://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVZD-93XM not 1996 as given in article. Nigej (talk) 08:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am a professional genealogist and I researched this before Mr Sewell's death. The birth registration identified by Nigej is certainly the right one. His researches are correct. I have been intrigued by the middle initials. I have considered purchasing a copy of the certificate to see what they stand for, but thus far I am not sufficiently interested to fork out the £9.25 it would cost to obtain one. We are all in England and Wales (at least until very recent times) given the surname of our mothers at birth (not the surname of our fathers). Of course if our mother is married to our father then we will have his surname as well. I think it is well known (and certainly Nigej is again correct on this) that Mr Sewell was born prior to his mother's marrying his stepfather (surnamed Sewell) so he would naturally have had his mother's surname of Perkins when he was born. (If you have a full English birth certificate then you will see that children are not actually given surnames at birth, they simply assume that the surname is that of the mother as stated on the certificate). John2o2o2o (talk) 01:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I should also just add that the birth certificate will not include the name of Mr Sewell's father. There is a way to check this even without purchasing a full certificate and I have verified this. The space for father's name and surname will be blank on the certificate. The father would only be (legally) named on the certificate of a child born to unmarried parents if he consented to it and turned up at the Registry Office with the mother. In those cases children appear twice in the birth registration indexes. Once under the father's surname and separately under the mother's surname. Sometimes in cases such as these the mother implicates the father by using his name or part of his name as the child's middle name or names. That is why the middle initials in this case are so intriguing. Of course if they are simply standard boy's names then there will probably be nothing further to deduce from them. John2o2o2o (talk) 01:24, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information. There is a relevant article here. It seems to me that we have enough information now to include his birth name in the article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:49, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I am in agreement with the article you refer to. I was not aware of it and I did not write it. I think I ought to say here that I have my doubts about Mr Sewell's claimed paternity. One of the reasons I did not publicly state my findings here on the talk page during Mr Sewell's lifetime was because I did not want to embarrass him by revealing information which could potentially suggest a different paternity than the one that he claimed for himself in life. Four forenames is fairly excessive by British standards and if one of those middle names is a surname - and not a surname in his mother's family - (and that is a reasonable possibility) then that might strongly suggest an alternative paternity for Mr Sewell. The only initial that he shares in common with his claimed father is the "A" of Mr Warlock/Heseltine's middle name Arnold - and in Brian Sewell's case the "A" might not stand for Arnold anyway! A certificate could be very revealing. John2o2o2o (talk) 10:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
... "sloppy journalism drawing upon amateur genealogy which appears as fact on Wikipedia." Whatever next! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:33, 5 June 2016 (UTC) p.s. maybe we could split the certificate three ways and just pay £3.08 each?![reply]
Probate granted recently.under plain Brian Sewell: https://probatesearch.service.gov.uk/Wills?Surname=sewell&SurnameGrants=sewell&FirstName=brian&FirstNameGrants=brian&YearOfDeath=2015&YearOfDeathGrants=2015&AdvancedSearch=True&IsGrantSearch=True&IsCalendarSearch=False#wills
I think it's common ground that, from the time of his mother's marriage when he was 4 or 5, he was known under the name Sewell. Would he have needed to go through a formal process to change it from Perkins, or was the name Perkins legally only attached to his mother rather than himself? Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:25, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ghmyrtle. No, he would not have had to have gone through a formal process to change his name. Many people (including my own sister) have done so, but it has not always been necessary. To quote a source, Mark Herber in Ancestral Trails (2004) on page 61 states: "At common law, a name is merely the label by which a person is generally known. I could start calling myself John Smith and it would be perfectly legal (unless it was for a fraudulent purpose). No legal formality or advertisement is now required to change your name."John2o2o2o (talk) 12:07, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to Martin Evans. I stated above that I am a professional genealogist. I have 30 years experience in genealogy and local history and have worked as a full time professional genealogist for six years. In that time I have worked on behalf of around 200 clients. I have my own website and I belong to a respected professional association in the UK. John2o2o2o (talk) 12:11, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello John. Your qualifications are respected, but out of necessity wiki doesn't take expertise at face value; its the internet after all. We need published secondary sources to make claims. Do you have any to hand, I would be most interested. Ceoil (talk) 12:26, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello John. As usual my sarcasm was directed generally and by no means at you personally. Unfortunately professional qualifications count for nothing at Wikipedia. But I'm sure your expertise will help. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:35, 6 June 2016 (UTC) I'd be willing to pay the extra penny and chip in £3.09, you know. And I thought you professional genealogists were really coining it these days![reply]
Thank you for the offer Martin! I'd accept, but I'm not sure it's really practical. Anyway, I've just ordered a copy of a full birth certificate a few moments ago. They take about a week to arrive - a provisional despatch date of 13th June was put on the order. I'll let you all know what it says. Could it perhaps be uploaded here somewhere? John2o2o2o (talk) 08:39, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Phew, what a relief! My 2016 Christmas present fund remains intact. That’s very good of you. I see no reason why you couldn’t load it as an image here or at Commons. We have had a similar situation with Tom Jones, I seem to recall (although that was about a web image of a birth certificate). Although we then moved on to a discussion about photoshop skills, for some reason! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:24, 7 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
See below! John2o2o2o (talk) 17:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Birth certificate and leads to paternity

[edit]

Okay ladies and gentlemen. A copy of Mr Sewell's birth certificate landed on my mat earlier this afternoon. What shall I say about it? As what I am going to say constitutes original research that may upset some on Wikipedia. However I think it will be of some relevance to those interested in the life of Mr Sewell, so I shall say my piece and leave it to others to make of it what they will. I do however ask that if anyone wants to use what I am saying for publication in a journal or book that I at least receive credit as the originator of the research.

So down to business:

The certificate says the following: that the birth took place on 15th JULY 1931 at 20 Rivercourt Road, South Hammersmith. The mother of the child (who also registered the birth) was named as Mary Jessica Perkins, a Private Secretary of 31 Applegarth Road, Hammersmith.

There is a note that the child was adopted.

His forenames: "Brian Alfred Christopher Bushell". Note: Bushell is one of his forenames, but in the circumstances (no name is recorded in the column for father) may be a clue to his father's identity.

After a bit of digging I found that on 6th october 2015 Christie's advertised for sale a Colonial Andean Tapestry which was stated to have been the property of Brian Sewell. The Saleroom Notice stated the following:

"Please note that this tapestry is the property of the Late Brian Sewell, art critic and former Christie’s specialist, who sadly passed away on 19 September" and: "Please note that this tapestry was inherited by the mother of Brian Sewell from Agnes Bushell, wife of Alfred Bushell of Valparaiso, Chile, following her death in 1934."

In the circumstances it would seem that this may be highly significant!

Agnes Bushell's will was proved in London. Her full name was stated to be Agnes Sanderson Bushell. She was a widow of "Quinta Primavera, Las Zorras, Valpariaso, Chili (sic)". The will was proved by Reginald Bushell. (Please note: "Sanderson" is this woman's middle name. It is not her maiden surname. Maiden surnames were not used by women in England after they were married unless they were divorced.)

Agnes was undoubtedly the widow of Alfred Bushell who died at sea on 25th July 1910, but who was of the same address in Chile. His will was proved by Agnes Bushell, his widow (the abovenamed woman who died in 1934).

A notice of the wedding of Alfred and Agnes was placed in the Pall Mall gazette on 27th March 1875, which noted:

"Alfred son of Mr Christopher Bushell of Hinderton, Cheshire married Agnes daughter of Mr Charles Watson of Valparaiso."

Alfred's father, Christopher Bushell of Hinderton Hall, Cheshire was a wealthy man. He died on 18th February 1887 at Altrincham. His personal estate was valued at just under £120,000 in the probate of his will. His family were locally prominent and their members included Christopher Bushell, VC, DSO.

Alfred and Agnes had at least two sons who were attending Sedbergh School in 1891. These were Reginald C(harles) Bushell and Alfred C(hristopher) Bushell.

So Brian Sewell's mother named him "Brian Alfred Christopher Bushell" and Mrs Bushell who left Mr Sewell's mother a valuable Andean rug in 1934 had a son named Alfred Christopher Bushell. That is, in my opinion very significant.

Alfred Christopher Bushell was aged 13 in 1891. He was married at Paddington Registry Office on 16th July 1902 to Gladys Hilda Dora Levy. Gladys divorced Alfred Christopher Bushell in1912 citing adultery and cruelty as the grounds for her petition. She had four children by her husband:

Douglas Christopher Bushell, born 11th April 1903. Eric Alfred Claude Bushell, born 18th July 1904. Sheila Deborah Bushell, born 12th December 1905. Jack Reginald Bushell, born 7th May 1908.

Bushell would appear to have been a very unsavoury character.

In the divorce papers his wife complained that at their home in Chile he had in 1905, while she was pregnant, come home drunk and got into bed with a housemaid named Philomena. Other instances of adultery were also noted. He was also apparently in the habit of frequently returning home very drunk in the early hours of the morning. He was also noted as at the family's home at the Priory, Elton in Huntingdonshire calling his wife a "bloody bitch" and a "whore" and falsely accusing her of adultery. He was also noted as having violently assaulted her on a number of occasions while drunk.

She requested custody of the children and maintenance.

Now I suspect that this man - Alfred Christopher Bushell - was Brian Sewell's biological father and I think that he probably knew it. Given Bushell's track record it certainly seems possible (though this is speculation) that he could have behaved abusively towards Brian Sewell's mother. Bushell came from a wealthy family and another property was Bryn Garth in Herefordshire, which his uncle had been living in 1887 and which Bushell gave as his address when he was married in 1902.

If this man was Brian Sewell's biological father (as I suspect) and he was an abusive man it is little wonder that Mr Sewell totally disowned him and instead "adopted" Mr Heseltine as his "father".

If you have any questions or want clarification on anything I have said then please ask. John2o2o2o (talk) 17:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff. Ref 6 - DT obituary says July for birth month and I have changed article accordingly. Whether the page always said July or has been modified isn't clear to me. Anyway July seems correct. Whether any of the other stuff can be included I'll leave to others to decide. Anyway, I await the biography. Nigej (talk) 17:59, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, many thanks John2o2o2o. That was certainly worth waiting for. I only wish you could do a family tree for us! Of course, by posting it here, in the public domain it's very unlikely you will be given any credit at all. But reasonable for you to request some. That explanation makes a lot of sense to me. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fascinating indeed - thank you. I'm sure it will be of great interest to any future biographers of Sewell, and perhaps even a journalist or two - but I'm not sure that any of it can be published here, at least not yet. I've tweaked the wording a little, to at least raise the possibility that Warlock/Heseltine may not have been his father, as he claimed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
PS: A few more bits about Alfred Christopher Bushell. In the 1901 census (age 23) he was recorded as an insurance office clerk, residing at Woodlands, Chester Road, Bromborough, Wirral, Cheshire, with his uncle Charles J. Bushell (born c.1840), aunt, and cousins (and six servants). In 1920 he is recorded as employed by Bushell, Maples & Co. of Liverpool, and arrived in Liverpool on the Orduna, travelling from South America. He married Elizabeth M. Denham in 1927, registered at St George's, Hanover Square, London. In November 1932 (aged 55) he left Liverpool for Valparaiso on the Lobos, travelling with Elizabeth M. Bushell - their address was given as Effingham Place, Cheshunt, Herts. Bushell's first wife, Gladys Levy, died in 1963. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
PPS: I've also found a death notice for Reginald Charles Bushell, "son of the late Mr and Mrs Alfred Bushell", who died "peacefully" in Valparaiso in 1943. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, it's all kickin' off here with the genealogist dudes. So, would that have been SS Orduña? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's the one (but I never know how to add these ~ twiddly ~ tildes to letters....) Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:01, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's because you're not Spanish. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:04, 13 June 2016 (UTC) [reply]
Thank you for your generous comments. I knew about the 1901 census and the death of Reginald Bushell, but the other material I had not seen.
In respect of whether or not Brian Sewell knew his father's true identity, it seems possible to me now that he was unaware of it as the original certificate indicates that he was adopted. (Presumably this is a reference to the adoption of Brian Sewell by his stepfather.) The adoption process may have been an opportunity for his mother to conceal the fairly obvious reference on the original birth certificate. John2o2o2o (talk) 19:14, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am intending to upload a copy of the birth certificate here for those who would be interested in seeing it. I do however first want to just check to see if this is permissible. Strictly speaking certificates are Crown Copyright, but I don't know if it could be considered "fair use" in this instance. Your advice woule be appreciated. John2o2o2o (talk) 19:19, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's any problem uploading one at Commons, e.g. [1]. But it's unlikely it would be used in the article here. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:39, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. The way forward, it seems to me, would be to interest a journalist or biographer in the subject of Sewell's paternity - and then, after it has been published in a reliable source, it can be reported in the article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, look. As I have said before, I am a professional genealogist. It is my full time occupation and my sole source of income. I am a long way from retirement age. I do have a problem with Wikipedia. I consider it a bit insulting that the (entirely self appointed!) powers that be in Wikipedia have decreed that only material in published sources is admissible.
And if I say that I know better than your average journalist or your average biography writer about genealogical matters then I say so with some confidence.
I have wondered if this policy might be partly down to agents within the publishing industry itself pushing this agenda.
By this logic I ought to only trust my own birth certificate if someone writes a biography of me or writes about me in a newspaper. After all I only have my parents word for it that it is mine.
So, with great respect, I suggest that if you want a copy of Mr Sewell's birth certificate then you buy your own. Thank you. John2o2o2o (talk) 18:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info, at least we know it's worth buying now. Good luck with the publishing deal. I think you can probably trust you own birth certificate. Not sure I'd trust those parents, though. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:44, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, thanks to John2o2o2o for highlighting this information - and no insult to anyone was intended by my comments, or anyone else's so far as I can see. But WP:V is a fundamental policy - "Readers must be able to check that Wikipedia articles are not just made up. This means that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source." That's just what Wikipedia is, for good or ill (mostly good). The good news is that your chance of receiving a financial reward from someone, such as a newspaper, who is happy to publish the research, is infinitely higher than the chance of any of us editors receiving a financial benefit from the time we put in here on an entirely voluntary basis. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:08, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Does a birth certificate not count as a 'a reliable, published source'? And anyone can procure copies, far more easily than, for example, an obscure book from 200 years ago. Talltim (talk) 09:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:RSE: "Are birth certificates, baseball cards, etc. reliable sources?" Martinevans123 (talk) 10:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A minor point, but perhaps worth noting: https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/35658e5b-722c-3f22-aa5f-254deecd366c?component=5e3b354d-28f5-3893-b2cb-9c16ffeb2616 has some attention paid to the possibility of a relationship between Sewell and the Bushells, albeit not to the extent of John2o2o2o's research. The archive page above, titled "Bushell, Alfred C.", states: "Sewell was christened Brian Alfred Christopher Bushell Perkins, suggesting some connection with the Bushell family, although the precise nature of this relationship remains unknown. Five photos of Alfred Bushell can be found in: BS/1/3/1 - Personal papers: Photographs: 1910s." Sewell's possession of photographs of Alfred C. Bushell would appear to carry some weight.

Footnote: his FreeBMD entry is here, with two postems. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:26, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Identity of father

[edit]

"In 2011 Sewell exposed the identity of his father ..." This is a fascinating passage in the article and there seems no good reason to doubt any of it. But isn't there a strict policy on not allowing the Daily Mail to be used as a source? I'm sure we wouldn't want to contravene any such policy in an article still linked from the main page. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does it make a difference that it's from an article written by Sewell himself? I don't think there's a blanket ban as such on using the Mail in circumstances like this - I think it's reasonable to assume that it's printing Sewell's own words in this case. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:31, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That seems perfectly reasonable. But in the past I've seen some editors state, quite unequivocally, "never, ever use Daily mail as a source". If the Mail had an exclusive with Sewell here, as seems likely, we'd be hard pressed to find it anywhere else. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We need to take context into account here, if it was authored by Sewell, then ok, fine. This one time. I'm delighted to see the page get attention, bty. Ceoil (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Brian Sewell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:28, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brian Sewell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:24, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:22, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Former home

[edit]

In 2019 his former home, Caley House in Leopold Road, Wimbledon, was acquired by "smart developer" West Eleven, which gained permission from Merton council to create nine luxurious homes on the site: [2]. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:32, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Briana Sewell

[edit]

Whoever added the tag "Not to be confused with Briana Sewell" is a genius. OhNoPeedyPeebles (talk) 12:21, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brian_Sewell&oldid=1209093450"