Talk:Nigel McCrery
This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
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: | ||||||||
|
Ah, sorry, can't say I agree with deleting this page, although I'm not an editor. I did make an edit though, since the link to the wikipedia article on All The King's Men leads to a book of the same name, but which is not related to the BBC documentary. Nath 12:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Festrilmongrit (talk • contribs)
DoB
[edit]Article originally claimed subject was born in 1963, however makes references to him getting married in 76 at 23 and joining the police in 78 at 25. Although DoB isn't referenced at all, I have amended it to remain consistent with these dates. Also in this related article, a deadlink from the college gave his age as 36 in 88 which supports the change. Rayman60 (talk) 00:41, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Center Section should be a listed bibliography
[edit]But I am loathe to do it if deletion is a real possibility. Citations are a bear. 72.200.20.62 (talk) 21:48, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Subject editing his own entry
[edit]Nigel McCrery, the subject of this entry, is editing his own article. His IP address is 86.9.59.155 and he has made significant edits, some of which are wholly non-factual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.174.4.37 (talk) 11:16, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Proscribed source: Is there a better one?
[edit]I expanded the article with some use of a Daily Mail interview from 2008: Sarah Oliver (8 November 2008). "Revealed: The rags-to-riches life of the master storyteller who is now TV's secret superstar". Daily Mail (interview).. I was not surprised when this was removed. But we already cite the Daily Mirror, a worse or at least equally bad tabloid source, through Highbeam, for a TV listing of a BBC interview (which could probably be replaced with an equivalent TV listing via the British Newspapers Archive; in any case the point is the easily referenceable one that he created Silent Witness). And I tried making an exception and citing the Mail because it was an interview and it provides valuable information on his private life (otherwise I would have had to cite that to even trashier tabloid sources, like one on his supposedly dating someone) and on his having worked for Ardent Productions. I looked at that source after it was called "revelatory" in someone's blog; I decided it would be more in the spirit of BLP sourcing restrictions to use the original rather than that 3rd-party mention of Ardent. Since it's been removed, placing this here in the hope that someone with access to the British Newspapers Archive or something can find better sourcing for both, so that it isn't a choice between blogs and scandal sheets and an interview he gave to a newspaper that's highly unreliable for news and therefore blanket banned. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:36, 12 November 2024 (UTC)