Talk:Oliver Holt

Hunt/Cech controversy
This journalist was critical of the collision between Stephen Hunt and Petr Čech on 14 October 2006, believing it to be deliberate intent to hurt Čech on Hunt's behalf. He has written subsequent columns condemning Hunt whenever any incident occurs involving the player, referring back to the October incident. This has led to edits to this article from both the Chelsea perspective - documenting the criticism, but leading to an article with POV - and from the other side, generally changing the article's POV, with some vandalism.

I don't believe that references to this incident and the further press articles belong in a biographical article and so removed them. I'm a Reading fan so am not happy with the constant references by Holt back to Hunt, but biographical articles, particularly of living persons, must be NPOV. - Kruador 12:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * and I don't even know who Oliver Holt is...I just want the continuing POV vandalism of the page to stop. Dzubint 12:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Foul and offensive comment removed —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.157.216.152 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * i think maybe Kruador's bias is showing through. There aren't any Chelsea fans adding malicious stuff, only Reading fans who can't take someone condemning their player. read the edit history for proof of this fact. Some of these people should have been banned from Wikipedia but they didn't even get a warning.86.133.160.72 00:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

if oliver holt has received death threats from reading fans like the ones vandalising his article it should be mentioned —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.157.216.152 (talk • contribs) 13:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

In the interests of balance it should be mentioned that 1. Holt's articles are pretty much unique in the anti Hunt stance they take. They aren't supported by any of the factual evidence and raise the question of what connections he has at Stamford Bridge 2. Hunt and Sonko did receive death threats. There is no evidence that Holt has. Any 'vandalism' to his entry here could probably be defended as 'fair comment' 3. Puerile comments such as the one beginning 'Typical Reading fans' add nothing to the debate. Apart from being stupid it shows a complete lack of appreciation of the Cech / Hunt incident or of Hunt himself. General Factotum 14:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

YES Oliver Holt has had DEATH THREATS from Reading fans. He said so in his own column. thsi information should be in the article. so you think describing him as a cunt is fair comment. glad to know your an impartial observer —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.157.216.152 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the use of language like that adds to the information, no. I do think Holt has written a lot of shoddy articles that lack objectivity or any relation to the facts and pointing this out is fair comment. General Factotum 22:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've skimmed through many of the edits to this page, and they clearly aren't 'fair comment'. Personal attacks, nonsense, removal of legitimate content and uncited and partisan commentary do not belong here. Your opinion of Holt is simply that, an opinion. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, it is not the place for original research, all additions must be cited with reliable sources and it must conform to a neutral point of view. This is particularly important when  negative information is being added to biographies of living people. SteveO 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

In the context of Wikipedia I would have to concede that you are probably correct... Ironic however that whilst Holt appears to be able to indulge in personal attacks, nonsense, uncited and partisan commentary under the protection of his role as a pseudo journalist this resource does not encourage this to be reported. The means of highlighting this has probably been wrong, but it must be argueable that to highlight the bias or shortcomings of those who would seek to present them selves as serious analysts is reasonable ? General Factotum 09:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Trouble is, how does one 'prove' bias or shortcomings, both of which are very subjective? Unless a particular piece by a journalist has provoked a strong, citable reaction (such as Kelvin MacKenzie's involvement in the reporting of Hillsborough), or a journalist is sacked as a result of his shortcomings, then I don't see how it can be done. That said, I think the summary "personal attacks, nonsense, uncited and partisan commentary" applies to a great many sports journalists... SteveO 23:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe the article[http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/columnists/holt/tm_method=full%26objectid=18651449%26siteid=89520-name_page.html ] published in the Daily Mirror covers the bias angle, and the strong, citable reaction towards the piece equally holds true. He is having to go on local radio to defend his views. If that is a not a citable reaction, then I don't know what is. Ma60s

BBC Radio Berkshire
To be fair to Mr. Holt he will be on BBC Radio Berkshire on Friday (23 February 2007) to explain the reasons why he has written what he has about Reading F.C. to the Reading Fans and the people of Berkshire. It should be a heated and interesting discussion. JoeWiki 11:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have written a small bit about this incident just to clarify the situation as I think it is necessary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jimster 260 (talk • contribs) 20:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Oliver Holt has nothing to do with Oliver Derbyshire

 * 1) REDIRECT Oliver Debyshire

Hi,

my name is Oliver Derbyshire and I wrote the John Terry: Captain Marvel, as well as a Biography of Thierry Henry and a biography of Michael Owen. I assure you that I am a real person, I have a driving license, a birth certificate and more importantly the proofs to all my books.

I am most certainly NOT an alias of Oliver Holt. Please amend your article,

Olly

Oliver Derbyshire Camberwell, London —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.101.66.218 (talk) 15:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Oliver Holt
Mentions his wikipedia entry in his Daily Mirror newspaper column. Including edits by Reading FC and West Ham FC fans.

Also says he did not write a word of Frank Lampards autobiography.

Suggests renaming it The Madejski Page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.178.143 (talk) 20:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/columnists/holt/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.178.143 (talk) 20:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Poorley sourced, original research
Re: the edit war currently taking place - however obnoxious Holt's views, bear in mind that any information added here should be from reliable, secondary sources. Articles by Holt and Twitter announcements (by anyone) are not secondary sources. Interpreting and summarising Holt's articles is original research, which is frowned upon on Wikipedia. Sionk (talk) 13:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Oliver Holt. 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/20120222033127/http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=3&storycode=39598 to http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=39598&sectioncode=3

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) 03:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)