Talk:Neil Parish

Politician?
Should he not be called "Farmer and politician" as he was a farmer before during and after his political career? Rustygecko (talk) 21:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I tend to agree. Soon to become former politician I guess. Unless perhaps he decides to stand at the 2022 Tiverton and Honiton by-election on a pro-tractor ticket? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I agree with : in fact, Parish has tended to self-identify as "a farmer" first (he's also one of a few MPs who mostly represent the farming lobby) so a suitable reference should be easy to find.
 * I doubt he'd get any traction even with pro-tractor voters: it might just be a protracter of his suffering TBH ;)
 * Llew Mawr (talk) 16:27, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * How long have you had those terrible puns brewing?? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I love obscure puns were esp. where I also learn something. We really should have a Pun of the Day. Llew Mawr (talk) 00:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I have added "farmer". Martinevans123 (talk) 08:53, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * per MOS:INTRO "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article" - the intro claims he is a farmer, but the whole article only says he was one when he was 16, which was 40 years ago. If he still is a farmer, and has been one for the intervening time, the article body should say that, and should provide references to support such claims. I appreciate that "he is a farmer" isn't a controversial assertion "likely to be challenged" (per WP:BLPSOURCE), but it's acutely relevant to his current situation, and it's poor form that we're making that claim in the introductory sentence of the article without any evidence that it's true. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 11:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * As we all know, being an MP is (supposed to be) a full-time job. So maybe "former farmer" would be better e.g. The Times, Evening Standard, The Independent, his own website. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Date of birth
The FreeBMD page for registration of his birth is this one, showing third quarter 1956. Companies House also have him born in May 1956. Some other sources which give a date of 26 May include: Who's Who, europarl.europa.eu, and parallelparliament.co.uk. 26 May 1956 is also given at List of United Kingdom MPs by seniority (2017–2019) --Martinevans123 (talk) 14:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the sources. Who's Who's UK is considered generally unreliable per WP:RSP so can't really use that. Thought I think europarl.europa.eu site you thinked is reliable enough for the infomation cited but not certain.  Spy-cicle💥   Talk? 23:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'm not sure why europarl.europa.eu should be considered any less reliable than any official UK government source. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 May 2022
You need to add ‘tractors’ to his interests. 80.229.153.159 (talk) 12:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. &#128156; melecie   talk  - 12:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems he has a "specialised interest" only in certain types of tractor. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 May 2022
Neil Parish has now been appointed to an office of profit under the crown, and as such is no longer an MP, effective today. The sidebar has already been edited to reflect this, but the lead paragraph is still worded as if he's currently an MP ("who has been Member of Parliament (MP) for Tiverton and Honiton since 2010"). Please edit the lead paragraph to reflect that he is, as of 4 May 2022, no longer an MP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecarterclan1 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Noticed this has been done, but the top of the infobox still has the title MP next to his name, which needs removing 1234567jack (talk) 13:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Polyamorph (talk) 14:12, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * And he can no longer be the incumbent Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee, can he? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Interests
Who's Who here lists his 'Recreations' as "swimming, walking". This may be something that Parish has reported to Who's Who, but that's a perfectly reliable secondary source. Likewise the Somerset County Gazette here says "His leisure interests include music and swimming." Again, not a quote from Parish himself or from a website he controls, but a perfectly notable WP:RS. Not only have these details now been removed, four times by anon IPs, over the past two days, but the last revert came with a lovely personal attack in the edit summary: "what Neil Parish says about himself is not of interest. We deal in verifiable facts. I have observed at many, many articles that you do not have any real idea of what that means." They may be very mundane details, perhaps somewhat boring, but I'm really not sure why are they are not wholly suitable for inclusion in this article. Perhaps (one of) the anonymous IPs could explain further. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Is see that the latest IP has now been blocked. But the common tone, running through the edit summaries, is one of condescension. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC)


 * And now a new IP here, but with the same criticizing tone in the edit summary. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Only Neil Parish himself can make a claim as to what his hobbies are. No independent reliable source can ever verify that claim. As promotional, unverifiable trivia, it has absolutely no place in Wikipedia. 57.133.22.170 (talk) 09:57, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I disagree. We depend on WP:RS for most biographical information. Who's Who is one such source. I would suggest we get more views on this from other editors, so that a consensus might be established. Why do you regard the source and/or Parish's seemingly somewhat mundane interests as "promotional"? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Martinevans123 and 57.133.22.170, please do not revert each other while this discussion is ongoing. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 11:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Per WP:BRD, I have made two reverts within the last 24 hours. IP 57 has now made three removals. When should this be reported to an appropriate noticeboard? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This appears to be a slow motion edit war. Even if no one here technically broke the three-revert rule (when someone reverts four or more times in 24 hours), it still makes the page unstable. I get that you kept reverting in order for them to discuss more here, but you should've simply placed a notice on their user talk page that a discussion here is occuring and wait a significant period of time without reverting per guidance at Responding to a failure to discuss. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 11:20, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Though the unregistered user has joined the discussion here, so you both should keep discussing here until there is a compromise, or until a person doesn't want to discuss anymore and leaves the article intact. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 11:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I have added a couple of notices at their Talk page and they have been summarily removed. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:51, 17 June 2024 (UTC) p.s. do you regard the current version of the article as "intact" or not?
 * That's allowed, but yes, if they don't discuss with you after a few days, you may re-revert as I've also given a message about it. If, after those days, they revert again without commenting here, perhaps a report to administrators is warranted. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 11:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Requesting a third opinion might be a good idea. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 12:04, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Above I wrote: "I would suggest we get more views on this from other editors, so that a consensus might be established"? What's your view? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The hobby of walking doesn't seem verified by the source, and music interests seem trivial as they're fairly common (what type of music?). I guess the swimming part is fine as it is specific enough, though. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 12:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Before the revert there were two sources. The other one was this. I don't regard an interest in "music" in general as necessarily "trivial", i.e. that's better information than no information. But I'd accept that might be a personal view. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Mmm, on second thought, I'm not very knowledgeable about what should go into "Personal life" sections. ObserveOwl (chit-chat • my doings) 13:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'd be interested to learn if IP 57.133.22.170 has previously edited this article. Perhaps they could confirm this. Although, like me, you also seem to have already assumed they have. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

It's certainly an odd thing for the IP(s) to get so worked up about. And the edit summaries are complete personal attacks and, as such, out of line. The content is neither promotional nor unencyclopedic. Many/(most?) political entries here have a small Personal life section, in which details of the subject's wider interests/activities are included without it being an issue. Looking at this, for example, I learn the PM drinks Mexican coke, has a labrador, does Peloton and that his interests include football, cricket and horse racing. I don't think one line on Mr Neil Parish's interests is out of place. KJP1 (talk) 14:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * No word yet on Neil's prefered beverage. But perhaps he still has all his own teeth. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)