Talk:Paul McGarr

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.

[edit] Politician?

Unlike most Respect candidates, he may qualify as a politician, having polled 43:57 against the winner, and (more important than outpolling Labor, perhaps deprived Labor of the victory and something close to a majority). However:

• This sounds like a pretty small constituency (easy for outside help to completely change the situation next time).
• 27% differs insignificantly from Labor's 24% (since neither of them came close to the winning 34%).
• The context of Respect's and Trotskyists' limited electoral success means that this may be an early sign of an upward trend, but is more likely to be an insignificant ripple.

In the absence of a discussion here, involving editors with substantial WP records outside the topic of left-of-Labor politics and that takes seriously his claim as a politician (not just a candidate), i will remove him from Category talk:UK RESPECT party politicians.
--Jerzy•t 17:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism?

It would appear to me that the constant changes to this biography by Najjamoff in recent weeks are motivated by a personal or political antipathy against the subject of this page. - Mia-etol (talk) 05:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I have requested comments because it seems to me that the changes by Najjamoff and the anonymous 86.11.131.192 reflect a POV and have no place in Wikipedia. And as I've already said some of them may even amount to vandalism - Mia-etol (talk) 05:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

This comment is not meant as vandalism. It is important to reflect how busy this 'political activist' is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.131.192 (talk) 20:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Outside opinion- in the name of WP:AGF I wouldn't call it vandalism, but it's not cited- what's to say that the subject isn't involved in political activity just because they're not an office holder? JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 13:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The question isn't whether Paul McGarr is involved in political activity. The question is whether the words used imply that he neglects his paid work as a teacher to pursue his political activities. --Mia-etol (talk) 14:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I see- I missed the word "when". Still, uncited. I'd say include only if there's a source to say he takes time off of his job for political activities. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 15:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it's POV. The justification, "It is important to reflect how busy this 'political activist' is" shows that it's intended as a put-down. Per JeremyMcCracken, remove as unsourced. Scolaire (talk) 07:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)