Talk:Ron Davies (Welsh politician)

Untitled
RD's web page used to exist:. What do people think about linking to archive.org pages? Marnanel 04:15, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Family and personal life
There's nothing in the article about his family. There is also nothing about his personal life, apart from the fact he likes to cruise for homosexual encounters with strange men. I heard he was married, and is a father: is that correct? Is he still married? It is very relevant to the article, all the more so considering his risky, multiple homosexual encounters, and resultant downfall. Werdnawerdna (talk) 05:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Marriage
I deleted the section on the marriage, because it was bizarre, uncited, and potentially sensitive to living people. In particular, it was unclear whether the Stephen Matthews referred to is either of those who were linked to. HenryFlower 16:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Councillor
Could somebody who knows the facts update the bit at the bottom about him being a councillor. Sounds like he isn't a councillor any more, and therefore should no longer be a cabinet member either. Hypnoticmonkey (talk) 09:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Another moment of madness?
I've reduced the following paragraph, which was written in a strange manner:

On 23 September 2016, The Times ran an article entitled "Forest Chump: disgraced politician denies another moment of madness" in which video evidence of Davies and another man showed him placing rocks and other obstructions on permissive mountain bike trails in Caerphilly. The story and video/photo footage was also reported by BBC News, with a "right to reply" interview where Davies cut the interviewer short and ended the interview when challenged about his statement and why he would not deny laying the obstructions and condemn the actions. The story was subsequently reported across a number of national and international news sites and cycling media outlets.

There are various issues in form and content:
 * Only the part referring to the Times article is actually referenced to a source.
 * Parts are totally incomprehensible to readers (like me) who do not already know what happened.
 * What's a "right to reply" interview?
 * "when challenged about his statement" - what statement?
 * "why he would not deny laying the obstructions and condemn the actions" - what's the accusation here? Why would he "not deny it" when there's video evidence?
 * Parts are actually not notable enough to warrant explicit inclusion:
 * Who published it and also published it (with only The Times actually references)
 * That he cut an interviewer short.

Str1977 (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)