User talk:TessMay2

July 2017
Thank you for your contributions&#32;to Jacob Rees-Mogg, but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Our readers are looking for serious articles and will not find joke edits amusing. Remember that Wikipedia is a widely used reference tool, so we have to take what we do here seriously. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Nthep (talk) 18:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Hey there
It is is widely rumoured that rees mogg is not of our time. I've made clear it's just a rumour and that it may have originated from a satyrical website. Please put my edit back. I understand if you want to put it further down the page, but we're all entitled to our own facts. Rees Mogg of all people would appreciate this.

Also, if you could fix the typo while you;re at it that'd be great (extra "the" before Theresa May)

Thanks for understanding.
 * No because it's unsubstaniated, unreported and at the moment irrelevant. Nthep (talk) 18:40, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

It has been reported
It's been reported in the Daily Mash. It's been put in as satire but that's just the only safe way to get it out there. And either way, it is widely rumoured - everyone's heard the rumour so why does it need reporting?

ps - if it were changed to say it was reported as satire, and source the daily mash, and then say and some people think it's true. Would that be okay?
 * Not really, read WP:BLP and WP:UNDUE, if and when it gets greater traction and coverage then possibly it might merit inclusion but at the moment it's just a made up story by the Mash.  "everyone's heard the rumour so why does it need reporting?" - please read WP:Verifiability to understand why material has to have been reported, a) not everybody has (because they aren't British) and b) even if they have that doesn't add credence to the remarks.  Nthep (talk) 19:13, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

What changes would be agreeable to you?
Are you saying that the wikipedia can't mention the mash story, even if it makes clear it's just satire?
 * Correct. It's a non-story that is contrary to Wikipedia's policy on neutrality as well as being over-emphasised.  Once Rees-Mogg's image starts getting the same level of attention and comment from reliable souces like Boris Johnson, for example - then there is a time for a section about his image.  We're not here to spread the Daily mash's satire for them or give credence to it. Nthep (talk) 19:59, 1 July 2017 (UTC)