Talk:Andrew Marr
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Re: edit to Trivia - burqa
Given it was for his wife, I think it is safe to assume that Marr was referring to women's burqas rather than men's burkas. Also see [1], where it is spelt "burqa". Soobrickay 16:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Photo
Surely we can find a better photo of a well-renowned British journalist, than a blurry picture of him drinking a cup of coffee? --Immure 12:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- Is the screenshot I uploaded as a replacement to that image any better? Wikiwoohoo 12:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Only War and Peace
On Start the Week it often seems the only book he has read is War and Peace, fifteen times or not. Why are journalists so rarely genuinely cultured? All is second hand opinion Pliny 14:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's just possible he's read a few more books than that, given that he chaired the judging panel for the Samuel Johnson Prize in 2001. (Have a look at his article on the death of the novel.) Speaking of the Samuel Johnson Prize, should that fact go in the main section or in Trivia? Tobelia 08:01, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Source for Bias Quote
Changed the source to the original article, rather than a christian news portal with secondary speculation. Is there an irony in a news source with an open bias reporting on bias? Feel free to comment Dmanning 01:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
The article states "before gaining appointment as BBC political editor in _May 2000_", why are we interested in his political "bias" on dates before this. Newspapers in the UK are known for _not_ being politically neutral in any way.
If he displays bias during his time at the BBC (a publicly funded broadcaster) then this deserves attention. We need not be surprised if a writer at the guardian or the observer demonstrated left of centre views. Perhaps we need 2 sections, 1 for politics and 1 for bias?
Japanscot (talk) 15:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
in particular this sentence is at best hugely erroneous and almost certainly disingenuous "Whilst writing his column in The Guardian newspaper, Marr expressed a number of political views"
a writer at the _guardian_ expressed _political_ views. This is entirely unsurprising and needs deleting.
Japanscot (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Daily Telegraph
Surely it is more than "trivia" that Marr writes a column in Daily Telegraph. This runs contrary to the impression otherwise given that Marr has perfect Left liberal credentials. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.23.124.81 (talk) 12:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC).
I agree. That's not trivia. That's career information. User:Green01 3:30, 07 Feb. 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Allegations regarding personal life
Is it acceptable to include this information in his page or do we need to wait until the mainstream media report it? A Story You Won't Get from the BBC, Guardian or The Times - The Secret of Three of Westminster's Media Gate-keepers
- We Need to wait until the story is reported by a reliable source. If you look at this page you'll see that the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability not truth. The allegations may well be true but until they are reported in such a way to meet the standards for inclusion then they can't be added to the page. --RicDod (talk) 11:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

