Talk:Greg Beales

Notable person?
I would contest that this person is notable. Only one of the citations works and this is linking to a couple of references in an article. I'm not convinced that this person has sufficient notability for inclusion Wikipedia. (See Notability (people)) If no one disagrees, I'll nominate for deletion.Jimjamjak (talk) 22:49, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Added notabiilty and unencyclopedic tags. I will nominate for deletion unless someone has a good reason not to.Jimjamjak (talk) 09:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

This is actually out of date, I think Greg Beales is now working on one of the Millibands election teams, will find a source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nojaroo (talk • contribs) 19:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. But I still contest the inclusion of this article in Wikipedia. We do not have articles about every person working in Downing Street, nor on every civil servant etc. I will suggest this page gets deleted, although I'm not sure how to go about this. Anyone care to advise?Jimjamjak (talk) 08:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Greg Beales is lead on policy.Tech-hub (talk) 13:15, 21 June 2011 (UTC) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/8053538/Ed-Miliband-to-run-joint-office-with-Alan-Johnson.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tech-hub (talk • contribs) 13:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm still not satisfied that the subject of this article meets these guidelines on notability of politicians, for example, or general notability guidelines i.e. requiring that the person meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article". Thoughts anyone?Jimjamjak (talk) 12:38, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Anyone care to defend the notability of this person. I think the article should be nominated for deletion. The scant information available on the internet about this person suggests he is not worthy of mention in an encyclopaedia. In addition, the references claiming to support most of the content of the article either long longer work, or do not support what is suggested in the text.Jimjamjak (talk) 08:35, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

It would be very bizarre to delete this page; Whilst Beales is not very powerful he is unquestionably a power of significant influence and historical importance given his political relationships. The idea that lack of information on the internet necessarily suggests irrelevance is myopic at best; in this case it signifies a 'back room boy' who does not exert his influence through direct appeal to the electorate. Moreover there is no possible reason to assume that the inclusion of Mr Beales, even if you personally disagree with it, will cause any harm whilst it might be useful to a few; therefore it should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.167.235.121 (talk) 00:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think that my requests to improve the article or delete are "bizarre". This is simply how Wikipedia works. Your response is rather subjective. I have no personal opinion about Mr Beales or his "influence", whatever you take that to mean. My interest is that Wikipedia remains a encyclopedic resource, and not a repository for fluff and (potentially) self-promotion. I notice from your IP that your sole activity on Wikipedia has been to write about Greg Beales; while not in itself suspect, it leads me to believe that inclusion of Greg Beales on Wikipedia may be something that has more to do with your own opinions of him than anything else. I still maintain that he may not meet the notability guidelines. Please refer to those and review carefully before responding.Jimjamjak (talk) 09:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)