Talk:Jim Swire

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Aviation

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I removed stuff that's really a recounting of the trial. We already have articles that cover this - this article should be about the person. DJ Clayworth 18:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's the point of this article?

I think the point of this article needs to be made more clear. It just states that he is a doctor in the opening paragraph and then gives details of his life.Ray gillespie 07:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this observation: I've revised the intro to clarify the point of the article.Phase4 09:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...Did Swire not spend some time in the military as an officer and given knowledge of explosives during that period of his life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.154.168 (talk) 13:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

There are way too many sections, and they need to be cut down. Also, I fear that there may be a bit of pro-Libya/pro-Swire POV, so I added the tag too. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the article is a bit of a mess at present, but there are real problems with the neutrality tag. There is a genuine gulf between perceptions of the issue in the US and Britain. Most Brits are very suspicious of the Megrahi conviction, and are broadly supportive of Swire. This includes relatives of people killed in the bombing. The anti-Swire statements made by some legal figures in London and Edinburgh don't reflect public opinion at all. This doesn't stem from any pro-Libya feeling, and indeed memories of the murder of PC Yvonne Fletcher remain strong. OTOH, US public opinion seems quite different. In these circumstances it's difficult to imagine how the article could be rewritten to appear non-POV to all parties. --Ef80 (talk) 11:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The anti-Swire statements made by some legal figures in London and Edinburgh don't reflect public opinion at all." - The statements I added never said that they reflected "public opinion," and the article shouldn't say what the public opinion is unless a reliable source states so. It's okay anyways to post negative statements from legal figures in London, as long as they are properly attributed.

"Most Brits are very suspicious of the Megrahi conviction, and are broadly supportive of Swire." - In order to put that in the article, the statement needs a reliable source - and the same with any statement about American families.

WhisperToMe (talk) 13:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not suggesting that statements about US and UK public opinion be included in the article. I am suggesting that the neutrality tag be removed, as I think the POV claim is partisan. --Ef80 (talk) 17:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a total mess

Clearly the powers that be have destroyed Jim Swire's working life, and now looks for full redaction. Well done moderators for allowing this article to descend into chaos. May I suggest that Jim Swire's efforts digging into the nonsense behind his daughters murder be assigned to the Orwellian "Memory Hole" ASAP. This entry is totally pointless. This bombing happened 23 years ago, and still the lies are full on, even extending to the release of al-Megrahi - it's never ending. 23 years of Jim Swire's campaigning and we have this garbage. I despair. This sort of article is the reason I would NEVER contribute money to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.226.16 (talk) 17:41, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At least I can take a knife to this

I'm going to remove a good bit of unsourced content, the last version before I started is at [1], and can be checked if someone wants to look for facts to restore -- after finding sources for them. What I would suggest *instead*, however, is narrowing and focusing content which does not directly refer to Swire, and looking for new material which discusses him specifically Anyway, it's done now, have at. --j⚛e decker ^talk 06:04, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Susan and Daniel Cohen and Jim Swire

Re: The removal of this content

The Cohens believed Swire was being manipulated by Gadhafi and the Libyan government. Their claims are in a non-self-published book, and I do think it is important to include that view. If other people believe the same view they can be mentioned too. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jim Swire. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/5260/egyptsw.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:40, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jim Swire. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150630113406/http://www.firmmagazine.com/justice-for-megrahi-campaign-launches/ to http://www.firmmagazine.com/justice-for-megrahi-campaign-launches/

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) 18:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]