Talk:Keir Starmer

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Keir Starmer article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 30 days

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

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.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

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

Biography: Politics and Government

	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 articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance).

Politics of the United Kingdom Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism Mid‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Mid‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Mid‑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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Want to add new information about Keir Starmer?
Please consider choosing the most appropriate article, for example:

Thanks!

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Rebecca Speare-Cole (19 December 2019). "Sir Keir Starmer at centre of Wikipedia 'millionaire' row ahead of expected Labour leadership bid". Evening Standard. Retrieved 19 December 2019. But Sir Keir - who this week insisted he came from working class roots - has already found himself at the centre of controversy after a reference to him being a "millionaire" was added and removed several times from his page.
Alex Matthews (19 December 2019). "WIKISNEAKS Sir Keir Starmer's Wikipedia page edited to remove reference to being a 'millionaire' ahead of Labour leadership bid". The Sun (United Kingdom). Retrieved 19 December 2019. SIR Keir Starmer's Wikipedia page has been edited to remove a reference to him being a "millionaire" ahead of his bid to be Labour leader. The text was taken off the site early on Tuesday morning and was reportedly tracked back to an internet address in North London.
Carly Read (19 December 2019). "Who doesn't want to be a millionaire? Labour leadership contender Keir Starmer in Wikipedia WAR over how rich he is: Claim is added then removed three times in two days". Daily Mail. Retrieved 22 December 2019. Sir Keir Starmer is at the centre of a 'Wikipedia-war' today as the word 'millionaire' was repeatedly removed from his official page.
Alex Matthews (20 December 2019). "Labour's Keir Starmer embroiled in row after 'millionaire' reference on Wikipedia removed". Daily Express. Retrieved 22 December 2019. But he has already found himself embroiled in a scandal after a reference to him being a millionaire was added and removed from his Wikipedia page several times.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Keir Starmer. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Keir Starmer at the Reference desk.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:

June 30 to July 6, 2024 (2nd)
July 7 to 13, 2024 (11th)

RFC Content restoration

Can this content be restored to the page?

When asked by J. K. Rowling in July 2024 whether transgender women with a gender recognition certificate have the right to use women-only spaces, Starmer replied, "No. They don't have that right. They shouldn't".^[1]^[2] Helper201 (talk) 02:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Hunter, Ross (2 July 2024). "Keir Starmer: transgender women 'don't have right' to use women-only spaces". The National. Archived from the original on 7 July 2024. Retrieved 8 July 2024.
^ Tabberer, Jamie. "Keir Starmer says transgender women 'don't have the right' to use women-only spaces, even if they have a GRC". Yahoo! News. Attitude. Archived from the original on 3 July 2024. Retrieved 8 July 2024.

Please see the section above this one titled "Removal of reliably cited content" for more information. Helper201 (talk) 03:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (bot-summoned) I'd not be inclined to support this for the following reasons: (1) The origin of the statement is not referenced; at the very least, the original interview needs to be available for verification. (2) The Yahoo News links do not work for me, so I cannot verify that source. (3) This BBC piece gives a detailed elaboration of Stamer's (and Labour's) position, which does not exactly accord with the text above. Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 04:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Goldsztajn Here is the origin of the statement. You can read an achieved copy without being subscribed to the times - here. In Regards to Yahoo News, this link should work. Other sources on the matter can be seen here and here. Helper201 (talk) 05:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Starmer's reply speaks of "biological women's spaces", not "women's spaces". Whatever one thinks of the qualifier, he has not answered Rowling's question directly; so I do not support the text. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 06:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  The Times, per the link above, says that Rowling asked Labour on X: "Do biological males with gender recognition certificates have the right to enter women-only spaces? It’s a simple yes/no question." They go on to say that Starmer answered: "No. They don’t have that right. They shouldn’t. That’s why I’ve always said biological women's spaces need to be protected."
  
  Isn't that a direct "no" in answer to Rowling's question? -- DeFacto (talk). 07:40, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  The answer is equivocal, ambiguous. Is he affirming... "existing government guidance [that] allows for single-sex spaces, such as restrooms and changing rooms, to be restricted based on sex when deemed necessary."? ("Who is Britain’s new prime minister Keir Starmer and what's his LGBTQ+ rights record?" The Advocate) I think the sourcing indicates his position has shifted (ie more equivocal) over the years on the issue of trans rights in general (The Advocate, BBC, Pink News) but on the basis of current sourcing I do not think Wikipedia voice should be used to state Stamer uneqivocally believes "transwomen do not have the right to access women-only spaces". Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  It's not our job to analyse the answer, but we can allow readers to form their own interpretations by giving the question and answer in the voices of the questioner and the answerer. These get weight from the secondary sources that support them, and are clearly verifiable from the primary sources.
  
  The only valid question I can see is whether it is relevant to the subject of this article. -- DeFacto (talk). 07:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  But the removed text was an analysis of the answer in Wikipedia voice and elided Starmer's qualified, full response. I don't in principle have any problem in including text on Starmer's changed position regarding trans rights, the sources clearly indicate he has moved from one of broad support to equivocal support. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 07:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Yes, it needs to be worded appropriately with respect to the sources and to the Wiki policies. -- DeFacto (talk). 08:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  
  @Goldsztajn It doesnt say he "uneqivocally believes transwomen do not have the right to access women-only spaces". It said that he responded "No. They don't have that right. They shouldn't" in july 2024 when asked by jk rowling. A Socialist Trans Girl 10:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Thanks for the ping, but I'm not sure I can add anything that I've not already said. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. A reliable source for it (the times) has been provided; so why not?

A Socialist Trans Girl 10:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do not restore Per Balancing aspects, "An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject." Based on the sources used, this story lacks weight for inclusion, considering the coverage Starmer has received on numerous stories, of which only the most significant belong.

Due to the scant coverage of Starmer's comment and the lack of context, we don't know what he actually meant. One editor suggested we add his quote and allow the reader to decide, but the reader requires context and preferrably the opinions of informed observers in order to make this call.

It may be that the story becomes significant, Starmer is asked to clarify his comments and political supporters and opponent weigh in. In that case it may be due for inclusion.

For background, the extreme right has recently become obsessed with what bathrooms transexuals are allowed to use and have little interest in getting their facts right. But the mainstream has mostly ignored the issue.

TFD (talk) 15:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that this is a well-sourced comment. I disagree that the topic is a minor aspect of the views of the Prime Minister of a nation, particularly a western-democracy where discussions about transgender topic are increasingly common, and yes, even in "mainstream" sources. In the past year, BBC has reported on issues regarding transgender individuals and bathrooms no less than seventy-six times. 151 times for The Guardian. Increased reports of anti-trans hate crimes (rose by 11% in 2023, pushing level to the highest they've been since 2012) have also brought the issue into increased political relevance.

All to say, this factual, and well-cited, short sentence on a world leader's position on a modern and pressing political issue is appropriate for this article. Jcgaylor (talk) 09:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quote magnets add a lot of clutter in some political pages and in principle we should not cover every quote or opinion on an issue unless it has been picked up by enough sources. I am honestly asking if this quote has been picked up by more than two sources because that would help us understand if it is right for this page. If it is included we do not need like a dozen sources on the actual article page but I am asking for the sake of this talk page. Jorahm (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strange phrasing in Director of Public Prosecutions section

"that Starmer was personally responsible for allowing to proceed the prosecution of Paul Chambers"

Doesn't that sound at best awkward, at worst ungrammatical? I suggest:

that Starmer was personally responsible for allowing the prosecution of Paul Chambers to proceed 86.21.234.75 (talk) 16:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- Alarics (talk) 12:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite protections

Why in royalty's name is the page both indefinitely WP:SEMI and WP:PC?197.244.75.233 (talk) 08:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PC was needed when the article was ec protected for a finite duration; it is not needed now. I removed the pc, leaving the indefinite semi in place. Ymblanter (talk) 08:22, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate links to Rishi Sunak

We don't need three links to Rishi Sunak in the infobox. Only one is needed. 150.143.27.224 (talk) 10:34, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per MOS:REPEATLINK, infoboxes, tables etc are exempt from the overlink rule. This is because they are not intended to be read from end to end like a paragraph or section. Unknown Temptation (talk) 11:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not true, REPEATLINK reads: Other mentions may be linked if helpful, such as in infoboxes. Clearly, linking Sunak three times in the infobox is not helpful. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Starmer later wrote amidst the ongoing riots across England and Northern Ireland following the stabbing"

The riots ended in early August, so are no longer ongoing. 51.7.13.182 (talk) 23:35, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Hunter, Ross (2 July 2024). "Keir Starmer: transgender women 'don't have right' to use women-only spaces". The National. Archived from the original on 7 July 2024. Retrieved 8 July 2024.

[2] Tabberer, Jamie. "Keir Starmer says transgender women 'don't have the right' to use women-only spaces, even if they have a GRC". Yahoo! News. Attitude. Archived from the original on 3 July 2024. Retrieved 8 July 2024.

[1]

[2]