Talk:William Hague

Coat of arms
I found an image of the letters patent granting his coat of arms from the College of Arms; I think the details of his coat of arms should be added to his profile. The image comes from a framer who framed his letters patent. Here is the image itself: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5823027b29687f56941775d9/t/5a69fdfdec212d4006cf2622/1516895869206/IMG_5429.JPG?format=1000w And here is the website from whence the image came: https://www.pureandapplied.co.uk/new-blog/vellum-indentures-letters-patent-royal-charters

It gives you all the information you need, so my suggested infobox would look like this:

Soapboxing and Npov
Large sections of this article are starting to look like a speech from the subject - large quotes that Hague said this... no rebuttals - I am going to go through it and trim the soap in the near future unless anyone can explain why I should not... Off2riorob (talk) 00:08, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

The William_Hague section for example ... says

In March 2011 Hague said in a speech to business leaders...bla bla... the Foreign Secretary stated ..bla bla .. Hague has warned ..bla bla ..the Foreign Secretary said:..bla bla ... Hague, on his way to Qatar summit in April 2011, called for ..bla bla .. Mr Hague said. .. he added ...more bla ..he said. yet more bla bla .. he added... bla bla ..Hague, speaking on the protests in Syria said ... more bla bla bla...

Not everything the subjects says is noteworthy in his life story. Off2riorob (talk) 00:16, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It still reads like this! Just came here to say the same thing. So much fluff. What this article need is more of what Hague actually DID. Such as something like "During Hague's tenue British foreign policy supported, and later armed, the rebels in Syria who flatly refused to negotiate with Assad, rather than encourage a non-violent transition proposed by the willing if untrusted regime".
 * Don't want to be POV with statements (like explicitly blaming him for the civil war and what followed) but this is practically what happened. There are plenty of sources to use in the press for actual - rather than stated - policy I just don't have the time to do it all myself. Harshmustard (talk) 15:26, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Stephen Lawrence
Can someone put in a section about William Hague's comments on Macpherson enquiry back in 1999-2001. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.83.209 (talk) 23:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Mckinsey contract
I am not sure if I am missing something, but I don't see how Hague's former employer being awarded a government contract in a department not managed by Hague is relevant to an article about Hague? I've left the section in for now but could someone explain why it should be in this article and not one about McKinsey (or even there, I don't think it is a good idea to list every contract a company has).

Near the beginning of 2011, it was revealed that Hague's former employer, McKinsey, had been awarded more than a £1m in NHS consultancy fees. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/12/management-consultants-paid-7m-gps


 * What absolute nonsense. It's very relevant when someone uses their political connections to help win government contracts that they themselves have a financial interest in. Your faux-scepticism and passive-aggressive question didn't go unnoticed. You've removed a relevant piece of information with a good reference, apparently because you are trying to whitewash the article. I motion to revert: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Hague&diff=472662318&oldid=471116969

It would indeed be relevant, if we had any evidence that it was so. He worked for McKinsey in a vey junior capacity 25 years ago, so it is hardly likely that he is in close touch with the firm's workings nowadays, and I don't see any evidence that he has a personal "financial interest" - public figures nowadays are subject to pretty stringent rules and regulations about this kind of thing, and would be expected to absent themselves from any decision-making in which they could be accused of having a personal interest. If you want to include this (libellous) insinuation in the article you would need to find a good source which actually makes it, not juxtapose unrelated facts in such a way as to invite the reader to draw an unsubstantiated conclusion.MissingMia (talk) 00:41, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Resignation
What exactly is the difference between a "full" Conservative party leader and a Conservative party leader?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.65.206 (talk) 01:18, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I think this refers to the fact that until the election of Andrew Bonar Law in 1922 there was technically no post of leader of the Conservative Party, rather there was a party leader in the house of Commons and a party leader in the House of Lords. Austin Chamberlain who was leader in the Commons 1921-1922, and was the de facto overall leader, is often stated to be the only Conservative Leader before Hague not to be Prime Minister,. Actually earlier leaders in the Commons had also failed to gain this office (in their cases because the Party leader in the Lords was the more senior figure and thus became Prime Minister). Thus I think what is trying to be said here (albeit not terribly clearly) is that Hague was the first person to hold the official title 'Leader of the Conservative Party' not to become Prime Minster. Dunarc (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure this is actually true, and we need a better source. The previous system was that an ex Prime Minister was overall leader (e.g. Lord Beaconsfield in 1880-1) but if neither was an ex PM then they were regarded as equals (e.g. Stafford Northcote and Lord Salisbury in 1881-5, with the former being initially regarded as the more senior). Balfour as an ex PM was, obviously, overall leader in 1905-11, but Bonar Law (1911-21) and Austen Chamberlain (1921-2) were certainly treated as such. I can't even remember who was leader of the Tories in the Lords in 1921-2 (Curzon? Birkenhead? or some nonentity?). The article currently sources this claim to the online obituary of Robert Carr, who was briefly acting leader for about a week in 1975, I can't find any claim in said obituary that the "modern job of party leader" was invented in the early 1920s. I'm guessing that the practice of acclaiming the new Tory leader by a joint meeting of MPs and Peers began in 1922 - it continued with Chamberlain in 1937 and Churchill in 1940. I don't know whether this was just rubber-stamping a convention which had already arisen, or whether that gave him the right to appoint the Tory leader in the Lords.Paulturtle (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)


 * This was to a large extent a hangover from informal emergences and Royal Prerogative selections in government. In both the Conservative and Liberal parties of the 19th century the parties in each house did a lot of their own self-organisation in opposition without leaders from the other house having much say. The Prime Minister of the day was recognised as the overall leader of the party and this accolade stayed with them when the party went into opposition but otherwise the two leaders were (at least nominally) co-equal or one would have emerged as superior in a political crisis such as 1846 or 1916. In the normal course of things the choice of who would be Prime Minister would be left to the monarch, at least formally (usually there would be one clear candidate). The triumph of the Commons over the Lords in 1911 did point towards the former's leader being generally superior but Chamberlain in 1921-1922 was described as leader of the party in the Commons in formal contemporary references (such as the Conference guide that year) and there were certainly peers who were very clear that he wasn't their leader which did not help his position as the backlash against Lloyd George and the Coalition grew across the party.
 * Law did not accept the commission to form a government until after he had entrenched his position by being formally elected leader of the party at a meeting of MPs, peers and selected candidates. This was an open vote on a single name rather than the modern conception of multiple closed ballots but was a clear step in the post being established in its own right and not merely a de facto status of the current/recent Prime Minister. Timrollpickering (Talk) 15:23, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Books
We should add in a list of the books he has written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.193.123 (talk) 13:45, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Certainly his biography of Pitt the Younger deserves more than just a mention. I believe it's regarded as the definitive work on one of our most successful prime minsters. Valetude (talk) 20:36, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Semiprotection
Just a friendly note - it is better that IPs who may have a COI get an coherent account that can discuss changes on the talk page, and other editors can converse with a single account. Better for all of us that we discuss articles and keep them as neutral as possible. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Early life
then attended Wath-upon-Dearne Comprehensive, a state secondary school near Rotherham, then known as Wath Grammar School.

shouldn't this read

then attended Wath Grammar School, a state grammar school near Rotherham.

the reference to Wath-on-Dearne Comprehensive gives the impression of comprehensive education and could be seen as political spin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.67.142.73 (talk) 18:38, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

War Criminal
Where is the section regarding Hague being a War Criminal leading the UK to atrocities abroad to divert attention from the UK economy failing? 86.139.189.47 (talk) 16:21, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

LG episode
Seems surprising that there is nothing in the article about the LG inward investment to Newport, given it's significance at the time, and indeed the later fall out. There must be plenty of sources about the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.104.7.206 (talk) 21:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Tory Boy inspiration
Harry Enfield has stated that Hague's famous 1977 Conference speech was the inspiration for Tory Boy, mentioned in the book "Harry Enfield and his Humourous Chums", but a cursory search fails to find a quote online. Can someone track this down?--MartinUK (talk) 12:26, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

William Hague bio
Please make up your mind whether William Hague attended a comprehensive or a grammar school. Both are mentioned in your article. They are totally different.

If I had turned in text like this when I was a journalist, I would have been fired.

Jeannie Lucas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.105.51.76 (talk) 11:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Recast sentence to say that he attended Wath Comprehensive, a school that was previously Wath Grammar. Acabashi (talk) 10:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Ffion - separate page?
I think Ffion has done enough to merit her own page. Valetude (talk) 22:45, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Create it then. See if it flies.Nickpheas (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Julian Assange questioning by Swedish authorities
Swedish authorities have confirmed that they've going to question Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/13/julian-assange-wikileaks-swedish-prosecutors-london-interview — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.36.83 (talk) 03:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

One Nation or Thatcherite?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.67.32.161 (talk) 03:00, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

So he's retired ?
If not, his specific job right now should be mentioned in the first sentence, or, say that he is retired in the first sentence. The article is very unclear about this.

Appointment to the Peerage
Hague's title should now read The Right Honourable The Lord Hague seeing as he received a life peerage this week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjuliano1 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on William Hague. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120402210300/http://www.google.com:80/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5je0GXux6yEJNwOin-3xbUi_9E7iw?docId=N0050531333278291923A to http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5je0GXux6yEJNwOin-3xbUi_9E7iw?docId=N0050531333278291923A
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150416201453/http://www.suntci.com/index.php?p=story&id=2614 to http://www.suntci.com/index.php?p=story&id=2614
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140905214732/http://www.france24.com/en/20120817-russia-issues-warning-britain-over-assange to http://www.france24.com/en/20120817-russia-issues-warning-britain-over-assange

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2016
Remove the website for William Hague from the right hand column at the bottom near the signature. The reason being it no longer exists.

165.120.81.229 (talk) 10:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Added dead link template --allthefoxes (Talk) 13:39, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Money - where from?
He lives in a large mansion in the countryside - where did he get the money from? 92.29.119.117 (talk) 08:34, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Probably inheritance and after dinner speaking and consultancy. -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 17:10, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Relevance of style of address section
Hey

What's the encyclopaedic relevance of a style of address section? How is it relevant how someone wants to be addressed? Isn't it a bit pompous - and surely it varies by title so would only really be relevant on those pages? -- Eraserhead1 &lt;talk&gt; 16:18, 29 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree that it should be removed here, unless it is specifically mentioned by secondary sources then I don't see the need for this section. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 11:02, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

He was married on December 19, 1997
William Hague was married on 19 December 1997, at the Palace of Westminster according to this link.
 * ❌ if you read the Chapel of St Mary Undercroft you will find it is the Palace of Westminster - it is just more precise - Arjayay (talk) 10:34, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Insert this then: William Hague was married on 19 December 1997, at the Chapel of St Mary Undercroft according to this link.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on William Hague. 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/20100515034600/http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/topstorynews/2010/05/her-majestys-government-49840 to http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/topstorynews/2010/05/her-majestys-government-49840
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100415020637/http://www.bl.uk/supportus/pdf/friendsannrep0607.pdf to http://www.bl.uk/supportus/pdf/friendsannrep0607.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.eypuk.org/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100305070326/http://www.rslit.org/content/fellows to http://www.rslit.org/content/fellows

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) 15:44, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on William Hague. 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/20100406054043/http://www.totallyjewish.com/news/national/?content_id=13722 to http://www.totallyjewish.com/news/national/?content_id=13722
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714161532/http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-us/our-ministers/william-hague to http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-us/our-ministers/william-hague/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081231220338/http://www.conservatives.com/People/Members_of_Parliament/Hague_William.aspx to http://www.conservatives.com/People/Members_of_Parliament/Hague_William.aspx

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) 12:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William Hague. 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://archive.is/20151121224613/http://www.debretts.com/people-of-today/profile/33378/William-Jefferson-HAGUE to http://www.debretts.com/people-of-today/profile/33378/William-Jefferson-HAGUE

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, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2021
Can Chairmen of the Conservative Party who served under Hague be listed in his infobox, as they are with most Leaders of the Labour Party, and many Leaders of the Conservatives? 81.157.224.127 (talk) 09:31, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ &#8209;&#8209;Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 12:52, 29 October 2021 (UTC)