Talk:Simon Hoggart

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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] Simon Hoggart's affair with Kimberley Quinn

What distinguishes Private Eye from the tabloids is that it doesn't break sex scandals, but will cover those already reported. I hope that Wikipedia will do the same. Talking of Private Eye, it reported that Simon Hoggart escaped Angus Deaton's fate (being mercilessly mocked about an affair on a topical comedy quiz show that he chaired) by putting his family in the audience. Should there be some mention of this? Tim Ivorson 08:37, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

The NQ anecdote is probably too incidental to be included in the main article. Keeping the basic details in the article is difficult enough, even though it's more than a "factoid", and included on very reputable news sites. Philip Cross 18:15, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia's arbitration list is backed up, and shouldn't be necessary when the guideline is already in place: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons Biographies of living persons (BLPs) must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm".Flatterworld (talk) 18:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hoggart's affair with Quinn found its way into publications at the top end of the newspaper spectrum, not only the red tops, and thus meets the requirement to be derived from reputable sources. Its inclusion would therefore be valid. The double standard in this country as regards extra-marital affairs is fading, so the 'do no harm' argument does not apply. One more reference is different from OR. Philip Cross (talk) 17:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The affair is mentioned in the Kimberly Quinn article, and it is not sensationalist as it has been covered in reliable sources: the Daily Telegraph is cited in that article (and was also cited in this article), hardly a tabloid newspaper. An affair would not usually be notable, or appropriate content for a Wikipedia article (privacy would be an issue), but this was with a notable person, and had received coverage in the media. Also, the "do no harm" issue is not particularly important, as what little harm there is has already been done. I can understand, however, if it is omitted from the article, as it is uncertain of the impact, if it had any at all, either positive or negative, on Hoggart's career and notability. --Snigbrook ^(talk) 01:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)