Talk:Matthew Parris

Letter
"The start of his career was overshadowed by a letter which he had written to a council tenant on behalf of Margaret Thatcher..."

...but what did it say??!! Badgerpatrol 00:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I found a comment here that says he responded to a complaint from a council tenant about the state of their council house by telling her she was "lucky to have a council house to complain about". Ironic, considering it was the Conservative "Right to Buy" policy/bill/act enacted when Thatcher was prime minister that permitted a huge volume of social housing stock to be sold in to private hands. I suppose the money it raised for local councils might have improved the quality of the council tenant he sent the letter to. I couldn't find a reliable source. There might be something about it in his biography if he has one.--Chris (talk) 07:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Castle in Spain.jpg
Image:Castle in Spain.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC) Mathew Parris calls for cyclists to be decapitated http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3097464.ece This so called journalist has been reported to the pcc for his article calling for people to behead cyclists —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.158.120 (talk) 18:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hair washing
Why does Matthew Parris' views and actions on hair washing not merit listing on this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.42.129.214 (talk) 09:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Because it's trivial and because its inclusion gives it undue weight. He probably has views on a whole range of subjects, and some of them may be quite interesting, but that doesn't mean they all have to be included here.  Rossrs (talk) 14:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * If hair washing itself warrants an entry in Wikipedia, why is it trivial that a notable person repudiates the practice? Mr Parris indeed does have views on a range of subjects, but the fact that he has stated that he never or hardly ever washes his hair is quite interresting, and certainly less trivial than "From a young age, Jackson often punctuated his verses with a sudden exclamation of oooh" (from the Michael Jackson entry). Matt Stan (talk) 22:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I remember reading his hair-washing article when it was new and never forgot it. It's interesting and unusual enough that it should be mentioned here.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dena.walemy (talk • contribs) 13:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Chilterns/Manor of Northstead
The article mention 'Parris "took the Chiltern Hundreds" and left Parliament...' but he actually became Steward of the Manor of Northstead (see List of Stewards of the Manor of Northstead) so I am going to amend that now.Half Price (talk) 09:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Criticism of Tony Blair
The quote from Matthew Parris is inconsistent. It starts in the first person, "I believe...", and ends in the third person, "Parris' cowardly attacks...". The Times reference given doesn't include the last three sentences of the para, and the last two sentences concern an attack on Matthew Parris by John Prescott, and have nothing to do with the subject of the section. A brief search on Google didn't reveal any source for the last three sentences, two of which include direct quotes. The third to last sentence makes little sense to me. Howevere, I've moved it to a new para and added "citation needed"; perhaps it should be deleted? I've moved the last two sentences to a separate sub-section, "Estelle Morris Controversy", in section "Radio and television work", again with a "citation needed". Oniscoid (talk) 20:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Siblings
"Parris is the eldest of six children (three brothers and two sisters)" appears to be self-contradictory. I'm guessing it means he has three brothers and two sisters, not that the six children comprise three brothers and two sisters. But there isn't a citation. Perhaps someone who knows for sure could clarify?

--Clive Jones (talk) 23:20, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Life & Career Vandalism
I do not know huge amounts about Parris, but his "Life & Career" section seems a bit farfetched and looks like it has been, rather comically, vandalised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.187.4 (talk) 04:30, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Times Newspaper references.
Many of the references in this article are from The Times (unsurprising as he writes for it). But they are unavailable except to paid subscribers ever since a "paywall" was put on the site. Is there a way to fix this? 87.113.174.20 (talk) 22:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)


 * This is not an issue. A source is just as acceptable, whether or not you happen to have access to it. To suggest otherwise would be to exclude most printed books and academic journal articles, along with newspaper articles published prior to around ten years ago from being acceptable sources, which would reject the vast majority of human knowledge and many of the best encyclopaedic sources. Atshal (talk) 19:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

2007 Cycling controversy section
I suggest this section be removed. It is a stretch to describe this as a controversy since the only citations suggesting notability are a letter and a followup article in the same publication within a week of publication of the original article (and a blog citation I have already removed). This incident does not seem notable at all. There are certainly many other incidents in Parris's life that could be considered more worthy of inclusion and much writing of his that is more controversial and received wider recognition than this minor piece from six years ago. It seems odd to include this - the sections seems to be have been written by someone who was irritated by the original article he wrote, based on the inappropriate conjectures and poor sources I have already removed. Atshal (talk) 19:38, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I am going to go ahead and remove it since nobody has responded. Leaving a substantial section for this article, which really is not so noteworthy, gives undue weight. I will also separately remove the Tony Blair quote, since his criticism of Blair is already mentioned, and this quote seems quite random in a way and not particularly notable for an article on Matthew Parris' life and career. Atshal (talk) 21:22, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Geekpie (talk) 10:18, 4 August 2014 (UTC)I would like to reinstate the Cycling Controversy section. It caused serious dismay to cycling advocacy groups at the time of publication and illuminates a side of Parris's character that is not included elsewhere in the article. I agree the section is too long. Unless there are responses, I intend to include a shorter section that simply includes the relevant quotation.
 * The changes that have been made to the article about this incident are clearly unencyclopedic and I have removed them. This incident really was not notable in the career of Matthew Paris and there appears to be an agenda to include it. Atshal (talk) 16:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, a large amount of cited material was removed in this edit as well. Atshal (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Since Parris' Christmas Custom comments still attract regular opprobrium 7 years later, and were recently quoted in an article about him in the Guardian, it is reasonable to say that they were not "notable in the career of Matthew Paris". [sic] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geekpie (talk • contribs) 20:12, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Yet again, an editor has been inserting editorialised and biased content. Please discuss this here before making further changes. Atshal (talk) 14:54, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

At this diff I have inserted a brief account of this episode, this time with NPOV, appropriate referencing, and quotations. It caused quite a stir at the time. Richard Keatinge (talk) 09:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The same arguments apply as when this came up before. I see no reason to include it now, and have removed the unilateral inclusion. 90.174.2.25 (talk) 13:19, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * As per the edit summary this addition was brief, to the point, and, unlike the previous version, well-referenced to good sources. To a lot of people it was the only notable thing that the subject has ever produced. It's clearly important and unless anyone can provide any well-founded disagreement, I propose to re-insert it. Richard Keatinge (talk) 14:46, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree. Seems perfectly notable content, with good WP:RS source. An RfC can be opened if necessary. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

It is interesting that it is a Spanish IP removing this text - and the article itself details the fact that Parris has a home in the country. Just saying.....! Can't be many people in Spain who would be interested in removing. -- 92.18.50.98 (talk) 20:24, 3 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, here's 576 to choose from, for a start? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:51, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Can't tell if you're being serious or not.... 92.18.50.98 (talk) 22:42, 3 February 2017 (UTC)


 * What a relief. Imagine how poor Matthew feels about it all after ten years. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:12, 3 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Again someone has removed the paragraph. I have reinstated an abbreviated version - OK, maybe it was too long. Please achieve consensus here before removing it. Richard Keatinge (talk) 23:48, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

“Parris came out in a late-night debate in the House of Commons in 1984”
Is it in the Hansard? I could not find it. If not, it may just be apocryphal though he claims this to be the case. – Kaihsu (talk) 19:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I also couldn't find it; he suggests nobody noticed - but the thrust of this article suggests it wasn't picked up on even if it did happen.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/08/20/matthew-parris-wishes-he-had-come-out-while-a-tory-mp/ (Doom halo (talk) 09:21, 19 March 2016 (UTC))


 * Book source, from Chris Bryant, added. I don't see what's dubious about this. 109.155.13.110 (talk) 18:33, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Chris Bryant repeats the story, but gives no details or reference. If it happened, someone should be able to find it in Hansard. cagliost (talk) 06:37, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for Comments
There is an RfC on the question of using "Religion: None" vs. "Religion: None (atheist)" in the infobox on this and other similar pages.

The RfC is at Template talk:Infobox person.

Please help us determine consensus on this issue. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:56, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Matthew Parris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140301171422/http://www.totalpolitics.com/articles/277577/top-100-political-journalists-2011.thtml to http://www.totalpolitics.com/articles/277577/top-100-political-journalists-2011.thtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:05, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Animal Farm Article Quote.
The quote in the article suggested to me that Mr Paris had "supported" the pigs when he read Animal Farm as a kid. I found this intriguing, and not a little difficult to believe, so I followed up the link. In the article Mr Paris makes very clear that though he had some admiration for the pigs he most definitely did not like them, or side with them.

Does anyone else think that the quote is a bit misleading and/or unnecessary?

The entire very short article is given below.
"Matthew Parris: Animal Farm by George Orwell (1945) It was so beautifully and simply and unpretentiously written, and all the characters came alive to me that he would of done). Matthew Parris: Animal Farm by George Orwell (1945) It was so beautifully and simply and unpretentiously written, and all the characters came alive to me Animal Farm turned me into a Conservative. When I was about ten, I pulled the book off a shelf and decided to read it because it was about animals and I loved animals. I did not know who George Orwell was, or what Leninism or Trotskyism were, or anything about Soviet history; and I only had a weak grasp of the idea of socialism. I was entirely unaware that the book was supposed to be an allegory, or that any of the animals in it represented real people in history. I just thought it was a children’s story and read it like that. I loved it. It was so beautifully and simply and unpretentiously written, and all the characters came alive to me. At first I applauded the farmyard’s rebellion. I was on their side against the humans and I hoped and believed their revolutionary new order of things would work for them. I was with them.

But as the story unfolded I realised not only why and how it wasn’t working for them, but — and this was the life-changing part — that it could never work. Although not at all drawn to the pigs, I began to understand that somebody had to get a grip and organise things. An admiration for their intelligence and sense of order dawned in me. I never liked them, but their final triumph taught me that idealism is not enough: you have to take account of “human” (animal) nature in the way you organise things; you have to incentivise; and that order as well as freedom matters. Orwell had stirred in me my innate conservatism. Perhaps, too, he had unwittingly betrayed his own."

So I was thinking
... maybe better to cut the quote and just say that

"He has said that an early reading of Animal Farm made him a Conservative." Which I think is intriguing, without being misleading.

Or if a quote is still desired, how about? "their [the pigs] final triumph taught me that idealism is not enough: you have to take account of “human” (animal) nature in the way you organise things; ...and that order as well as freedom matters."

Or maybe leave out the last bit after the "..." to keep it short.

Or perhaps "... I realised not only why and how it wasn’t working for them, (the Animals) but — and this was the life-changing part — that it could never work."

Just a thought, not really that important in the grand scheme of things I guess.

The_Laughing_Owl 79.72.133.90 (talk) 23:08, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

These suggestions strike me as a mild improvement; go for it. Richard Keatinge (talk) 10:14, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Looks good - go for it if you have not already.

Letter (again)
There's an inconclusive discussion further up this page regarding a letter which Paris allegedly sent to a council tenant on behalf of Thatcher: unless a source can be found, along with some detail as to the content and significance of the letter, it's a meaningless detail. I've removed reference to the letter pending this ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 09:03, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It seems you need to consult the Daily Mirror, but that is a tabloid, isn't it?
 * "I hope you will not thing me too blunt if I say that it may well be that your Council accommodation is unsatisfactory, but considering the fact that you have been unable to buy your own accommodation you are lucky to have been given something which the rest of us are paying for out of taxes." [spelling retained]
 * Martinevans123 (talk) 09:09, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding that: as you say, the Daily Mirror isn't considered reputable, but hopefully there are other sources out there ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 12:36, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * As you can see above I have linked to Auberon Waugh's column in the The Spectator which looks to me not only a secondary source but entirely RS? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:49, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Matthew Parris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090611150939/http://www.itv.com/ClassicTVshows/documentary/WorldinAction.html to http://www.itv.com/ClassicTVshows/documentary/WorldinAction.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/19981202070111/http://www.notmuch.com/Features/Interview/int-040498.html to http://www.notmuch.com/Features/Interview/int-040498.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:27, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Matthew Parris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717131630/http://www.libertybell.tv/content.aspx?page=56&sub=67 to http://www.libertybell.tv/content.aspx?page=56&sub=67

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

MP
"Parris was the Conservative MP for the parliamentary constituency of West Derbyshire from 1979 to 1986. Competing prospective candidates for the seat included Peter Lilley and Michael Howard. He voiced support for gay rights" -- Very ambiguous. Does it mean (a) that he voiced support for gay rights when competing with the other prospective candidates, in the party meetings where the candidacy was decided, (b) that he voiced support for gay rights in the House of Commons, or otherwise as an MP, (c) both? 22:35, 22 May 2021 (UTC)