Talk:Bridget Phillipson

Houghton being a safe seat
I live in this constituency and it is a known, verifiable fact. Da mad prof (talk) 18:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Then verify it with a citation. If you don't know how to do that, read Citing sources. —Ute in DC (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Clare Phillipson
I have reinserted the reference to Bridget Phillipson's mother Clare Phillipson as it is relevant. She was the founder of the local charity that first employed Bridget, was an official in the local Labour party that selected Bridget on the All Women Shortlist and is a local political figure in her own right. Her influence is relevant to Bridget Phillipson's political career. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.60.38.229 (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I have reverted the 2nd attempted deletion of the reference to Clare Phillipson, as it is sourced, relevant and factual. 194.60.38.229 (talk) 13:32, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

What is wrong with the details below?? They are relevant and sourced. Seems like vandalism to remove them repeatedly. Is it not relevant that the MP worked for a Charity founded by her own mother? That is just a fact, a relevant fact that should not be deleted. Take it as you will. It is a public record who her mother is, and she is a local official who employed and help her daughter get selected, so it is relevant.

She is the daughter of Clare Phillipson, a Labour Party official in Washington and Sunderland who founded Wearside Women in Need in 1983, a charity refuge for women affected by domestic violence that was investigated by Sunderland Council for not filing accounts in 2013.

What is wrong with them, for starters, is that Clare Phillipson has never been a Labour Party official (in the sense of a paid employee) and those sources do not in fact support the suggestion that she was. WPBPCP (talk) 10:52, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Repeated poorly sourced additions
I reverted (again) your insertion of poorly sourced material about the article subject's mother per WP:BLP. Facebook and blogs are not reliable sources, especially for articles about living persons. I also question the encyclopedic value of the addition, which appears to have a political, rather than strictly informational, motivation. Care to elaborate the encyclopedic value of the facts you have added? Geoff &#124; Who, me? 16:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * The Chronicle, The Sunday Post, Sunderland University? They all seem like good sources to me. And why is the WWIN's own page not a good source as to WWIN? The fact that her mother was a labour official in the seat she took over and a part of the selection, is of interest and factual. The fact that the MPs only job outside of politics was for a charity set up by her mother, is factual and relevant. If her parents were not in politics it would not be of anyone concern but hers, but her political background, how she came to be the MP is relevant and sourced. Redmist56 (talk) 17:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I wonder if it is you @Geoff, that has a political reason for deleting these background details? I don't see why you think they are controvercial. Redmist56 (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

To make this very clear. It is not factual that her mother was a Labour Party official — her mother has never been a paid employee of the Labour Party and as such it is at best utterly misleading and at worst straightforwardly untrue. Redmist56 and his previously anonymous account has been repeatedly making these edits from the House of Commons making it very apparent that the changes, and the knowing dissemination of misleading material about Bridget’s upbringing, are politically motivated. The published sources do not, when checked, support the notion that Clare Phillipson was an “official”, and even if they did that would not actually make it true.

Unlike redmist56, I have declared my interest here and do so again — I know both Bridget and Clare and find it very disappointing that these politically-motivated lies are being spread by an individual who frankly ought to know better. WPBPCP (talk) 10:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Repeated edits to information about her family
I know both Bridget and Clare Phillipson and have declared that here and on my user page as per Wikipedia requirements.

It is extremely misleading to describe Clare Phillipson as a Labour Party official and the fact that this change has been repeatedly made anonymously from a House of Commons IP address, before now being made from an account with no declaration of a conflict of interest, suggests strongly to me that this change is known to be false, is made for political reasons by political opponents of Bridget, and is made in bad faith by those who know perfectly well they are giving a misleading impression of Clare’s profession and therefore of Bridget’s upbringing.

The notion that Bridget’s mother Clare was an official of the Labour Party is on any usual British English reading of these terms, misleading. While Clare was a member of the Labour Party and periodically got elected to voluntary and unpaid roles within the local Labour Party, she was never a paid member of staff of the Labour Party, which is the normal meaning of “official" in the context of a political party in British English.

An official of an organization is usually understood to be someone who works for it and is paid to do so, not someone who volunteers their time for it, just as Wikipedia volunteers would probably and understandably bridle at being called "Wikipedia officials".

By virtue of my conflict of interest it is inappropriate for me to to make these edits myself, let alone to go on making them in the face of repeated anonymous edits, but I think it would be great if other Wikipedia volunteer editors could keep an eye out for this political vandalism.

I also wonder, given the history of anonymous edits being made to this page by IP addresses registered to the Houses of Parliament (though I note that similar changes are now being made by a newly created account without a declared conflict of interest) whether editors could consider protecting the page from such edits in the interests of the page remaining accurate, if that is a proportionate response to the issue.

WPBPCP (talk) 04:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've made edits to the relevant section that I believe address your concerns. I make no comment with respect to the veracity of the allegations of political motivation of other editors ascribed above and editors are generally expected to refrain from personal attacks when discussing content issues; my only reason for accepting this request is that it makes good points about the extent to which some contentious content in the article failed to reflect coverage in the cited reliable sources. — Ⓜ️hawk10 (talk) 05:00, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi WPBPCB, I appreciate your honesty that younareba friend of the Philipsons. I dont know them but have lived in the area for some years and know the background. Regarding you contention that Clare Philipson was not a Labour official - she *was* a local Labour CLP women's officer and self described as such, which to me sounds like an 'official', I think it is relevant as Clare Philipson and her friend the former MP Kemp, argued from within Labour for a Women's only Shortlist in the constituency, which benefited her daughter and Clare had a role (as a local labour official) in selecting the candidate. Clare as you presumably know was/is a major figure in local Sunderland Labour politics, and that is relevant to an understanding of her daughter who is now a national spokeswoman on education, so is a well sourced and relevant detail for Wikipedia imo. This wont of course be new to you but is less known to others. Thanks for your comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redmist56 (talk • contribs) 09:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)