Talk:Mark Harper

message: Having undertaken a clean-up exercise, there have been a number of recent edits by Mr Harper and people associated closely with him. In the latest, there is a specific edit summary which asks that we do not change (actually, not include), certain information - hence my application of the WP:autobiography tag. Having looked further into this, I can understand why there may be some personal concern with regards a person associated with Mr Harper. In summary, I am happy that this request does not presently compromise WP:PILLARS, as the focus of this article is Mr Harper himself. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 10:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For clarity, the name of the editor is Myles Bailey, Mark Harper's parliamentary assistant. Wikipedia should always be very vigilant when allowing the assistants of high-profile subjects to edit our encylopedia. 80.225.179.56 (talk) 17:21, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Anon edits, UK Parliament IP address

message: This is unjustified censorship.  The citation was given namely BBC Any Questions same day 10th Sept.  I will revert and complain if any more such interference with my contribution.
P.S. this person naming him/herself as Peter Karlsen has since twice more reverted sound appropriate material on patently false grounds.  This vandalism must cease else complaint will be made about Peter Karlsen's tampering designed to give a censored flattering account of Mr Harper.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.172.129 (talk) 00:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: firstly, it wasn't a "speech" it was a comment and expansion on a radio programme. Secondly, the current edit reflects the fact of what was said, not the additional commentary that you have tried to add back on four occasions. The current version seems reflective of the facts as they are at present and can be supported, and as an encyclopedia, we just reflect fact and not WP:OPINION. Unless you can find a political commentator or other reliable source who supports your conclusion, and hence support it with a reference, it can not be included. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 14:28, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: reversion of my edit about disability hate speech

message: I'd like to propose that this section be renamed Notable issues. Mark Harper deals with many issues, this section clearly doesn't relate to them all - just those of note. Obscurasky (talk) 22:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Supported Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 23:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:    Obscurasky (talk) 15:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues 

message: OK, well tonight I have added some more refs, edited in/out stuff that I can't find/can find suitable refs for, and added some cite tags where there is a clear lack of refs. Resultantly, I have removed the autobiography tag. Still needs more referencing would be a fair summary. Rgds - Trident13 (talk) 20:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tags and refs 

message: In light of more Anon/COI editting by HoP IP address 194.60.38.198, and in light of the discussion facilitated above by Guy (Help!) this is the first of two sections I have added re parts of the current bio. As this was part of the stabalised biography post Mr. Sagar's complaint to the Wikimedia Foundation, I am disapointed that someone else now finds the need to remove this. Its significant as it was both well referenced, well commented on (particularly I feel in light of Harper's previous shadow role as disability spokeperson), and the neutral chair immediately suggested Harper's comment were "outrageous." It should presently be kept. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 15:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, I had removed this section because it didn't seem like a noteworthy event to me based solely on the cited reference, and therefore not appropriate per WP:BLP.  But I'll defer to others that know more about UK politics.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your comments Edgar. I reverted your edit removal, and can understand why you may think that its could breach WP:BLP, as Any Questions? (which I have now linked in the article itself), is a UK nationally acclaimed and respected political talkshow. If the comment had been made almost anywhere else, then I think it could breach WP:BLP. But when the respect neutral chair of such a show calls the comment outrageous, I'll bow to his authority. Hence why I think its worth keeping, and hence reverted. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 16:04, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Disability comments

message: This is the second of two new sections after more Anon/COI editting by HoP IP address 194.60.38.198 - see section "Disability comments." As an outsider, I can't see a bigger issue in the forest than this one. Further, Harper seems to be coming in for a lot of wider critic on his personal position with regards the issue. We don't need duplicate text between this article and the one on Hands off our Forest, and this article section only needs to cover comments made about Harper with regards the issue. Yes, I added the Porrit comment in this context, and editted that down to keep it encyclopedic: his critic of Harper goes further, but readers can access the whole article from reading the accompanying reference. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 15:49, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Forest

message: I've expanded this section a bit to include Atos' comments to the select committee. This is a crucial point: is it the provider or the dept that is responsible for what happens, especially when things go wrong? It's clear to me that most people who look at it dispassionately see that merely getting a new company to do basically the same thing is not going to change all that much.
NB The select committee heard from several witnesses - they didn't just form a view based on their own analysis.
--Dr Greg Wood (talk) 12:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atos exit 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mark Harper. 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/20100709145121/http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/02/11/113780/interview-mark-harper-conservative-disability-spokesperson.htm to http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/02/11/113780/interview-mark-harper-conservative-disability-spokesperson.htm
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120914133856/http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/news/Support-grows-Forest-sell/article-2823196-detail/article.html to http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/news/Support-grows-Forest-sell/article-2823196-detail/article.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120915123954/http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/news/Hands-Forest/article-2808645-detail/article.html to http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/news/Hands-Forest/article-2808645-detail/article.html
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) 06:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mark Harper. 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/20080608221852/http://www.fodconservatives.com/ to http://www.fodconservatives.com/
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) 06:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Updated to 2019 election, and have given figures to two significant figures - but I imagine there is policy somewhere, so if in the light of policy any editor wishes to add more accuracy (at the cost of clarity of course, but there you go) then feel free :)   
Friendly regards to all, Springnuts (talk) 15:51, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voting figures to two significant figures