Talk:Jeremy Corbyn

Labour files leak
So, why is there nothing on here about the Labour files leak? The smears on Corbyn were shown to be a made-up, co-ordinated attack on him. To be added in due course Apeholder (talk) 10:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Apeholder, can you cite references referring to them? -- DeFacto (talk). 13:25, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Burrobert (talk) 13:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Burrobert, plenty there for editors to get their teeth into, thanks for all those. -- DeFacto (talk). 21:02, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm surprised the Labour Files and Forde Report don't have wiki articles yet tbh. G-13114 (talk) 16:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * They are probably not mentioned because they have had little mainstream media attention. I won't question why the media found the allegations noteworthy enough to report in detail but have ignored the leaked documents. You are welcome of course to add information.
 * I'm always reticent to include investigative journalism that has not been picked up by other sources, which is why I did not add anything.
 * There should be better coverage of the documents in academic writing some time in the future. TFD (talk) 22:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * The Four Deuces Since when does the justification for something to be added to WP rely on whether or not the MSM has covered it. Is WP just an echo chamber for what the mainstream are covering? Apeholder (talk) 21:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * See Balancing aspects: "An article...should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject." I agree that makes Wikipedia an echo chamber, but that's the intention. TFD (talk) 17:34, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * To avoid doubt, is not the Forde Report considered reliable, published material? Also, was not the leaked Labour Report a media story of some public interest? 95.147.153.125 (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Father
Sources come up online for his mother being a maths teacher, and for his father being an engineer (for GEC); nothing seems to come up with relation to his being an expert in power rectifiers. Where did this come from?

Independent Candidacy
I know it’s somewhat ongoing but given how much media attention has been paid, I think we ought to at least try add something on Corbyn’s candidacy (apologies if this message comes off as rude, I’m quite inexperienced so my wikipedia etiquette may be lacking) Oldboad (talk) 09:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

college?
with two A levels at grade E how did he go to college? He failed to graduate? Something not right here. 89.243.48.130 (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)


 * It's entirely plausible (and backed up by sources) that he was admitted on to his course with those grades. North London Poly is not Oxford or Cambridge. Mark and inwardly digest (talk) 14:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I got two Es at "A" level. I was admitted to University of London, Bedford College, to study philosophy. This was long before the grade-inflation that has resulted in anything less than four A++'s being considered a waste of exam fees. MrDemeanour (talk) 13:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Could someone clarify why he was not permitted to stand as a candidate?
Currently the article mentions that he had unanimous support from the local Constituency Labour Party. According to this article of Brevia Consulting (relatively well known among those in government) all that is then needed is for a local husting to confirm who gets selected out of a shortlist compiled by the CLP. (https://www.brevia.co.uk/news/politics/how-are-parliamentary-candidates-selected/)

But if that didn't happen, at what stage and how was he not permitted to stand? I could email him and ask myself but since Wikipedia prefers secondary sources perhaps someone who better understands UK politics could look into it? Cheers 46.162.86.84 (talk)  — Preceding undated comment added 00:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Clarification on lede
@Roger 8 Roger Apologies if the wording itself is grammatically incorrect, I thought that it was being changed to a past tense due to uncertainty of his status as an MP. English is indeed not my first language. Nontheless, doesn’t “has served as” imply the individual is not currently serving as but had done so? If so, is there a way to appropriately reword this in a grammatically correct way,

Respectfully, Димитрий Улянов Иванов (talk) 07:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * 'has served as' is a present perfect tense. That means it is about something that exists now (present time) (he IS an MP) following from a fixed past time, ie 1983, (ie since 1983).. and that state of being an MP continued from 1883 till now. The word 'since' means that is the starting point of actions in the past. If this isn't clear please google present perfect tense. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks for the clarification. Димитрий Улянов Иванов (talk) 08:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)