Talk:Poll tax riots

message: This page needs to be far more tightly referenced.  Actually lets just make that referenced plain and simple.  Some of the claims about police fabricating charges and assaulting tourists, whether true or not (I can't comment), simply should not be said without adequate support.  This is exacerbated by the use of POV language such as "heavy-handed" when referring to police tactics.  Philip Thomas 82.38.226.155 13:22, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refs 

message: The article talks about "unemployed minors" should this be minors or miners?  Strato 07:32, 16 October 2005 (GMT)
"Miners" as in those who worked mining coal before Thatcher closed the mines. GiollaUidir 22:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minors or miners 

message: The article needs to references to substantiate several claims. Others are plain wrong. As for the claims to POV language I think the use of words like "heavy handed" to describe the outrageous behaviour of the Metropolitan Police then I must say a neutral observer would find it fits the facts. The Met showed themselves to be a bunch of murderous thugs on that day. I have no sympathies for the anarchist spin on events either but it is an entirely flawed to reproach the author on this specific issue when it is plainly supported by the available evidence.
'a bunch of murderous thugs on that day'.- really - how many people did they murder?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.30.75 (talk) 14:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: (Very late reply) Class War were the group who put someone up for television interviews to support the rioters. Lost their spokesman his job, I think with a council. Steve Nally from Militant certainly condemned them..--Peter cohen 15:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Very, very late reply) Outrageous behaviour (referring to original post) - when you have a QUARTER OF A MILLION people descend upon a city, even if a small minority of those intend to make trouble, that is still an enormous amount of trouble. As a neutral observer (neutral as I was 9 at the riots so have no strong feeling either way for the Community Charge), I would say that such trouble making must be met with force to keep it away from the innocents (the residents and workers in the area) and to prevent looting. In recent years we have seen rioting in London, towns near London and further away, and one of the facts of it is that people feel the ambience change before the rioting starts - those who came to protest peacefully will disperse, those who want a riot will stay for the riot.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.35.235 (talk) 21:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blinkers 

message: These riots took place in England: nowhere else in the UK. --Mais oui! 17:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The riots concern the Poll Tax, a UK-wide tax, which occured on the day it was introduced in England and Wales. Scotland is even mentioned twice in the article. Tim! 17:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is not about the poll tax (it has its own article), it is about the riots, which were 100% an English event. None in Wales, none in Scotland and none in Northern Ireland. You have already broken 3RR: please desist. --Mais oui! 18:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You cannot make such an over simplifaction, the poll tax was created by the Government of the United Kingdom elected by electors of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. You cannot actually believe that all the rioters were English? Also,  I have not broken 3rr, please provide diffs to prove otherwise. Tim! 18:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How many times do you need to be told? This article is not about the poll tax, it is about riots. Don't tempt me on the 3RR front: I am feeling lenient, but that sentiment may not last. --Mais oui! 18:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  England 

message: "In particular, and as a result of the lessons learnt in Scotland by Scottish Militants, the campaign concentrated on a mass campaign of non payment. Militant was in the leadership of the movement because they were on the forefront day in day out campaigning against it - not just on the day of March 31."
I know I'm not exactly in a position to challenge whether or not the Militant were most important, I feel that this breaks NPOV and is biased in favour of the militant, and is unencyclopedic Joevsimp 11:24, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it's blatantly POV and partisan. I'm amazed it's survived in the article this long. Militant did have a prominent role in the organising committee of the campaign, although this is of doubtful relevance to the poll tax riots. It needs to go, this is Wikipedia not the Militant newspaper. --Sperge 00:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias Towards the Militant 

message: This article is called the poll tax riots but really only discusses Trafalgar Square. The one in Brixton that November(?) is worth mentioning even though it was not on the same scale as Trafalgar Square. (Well it was the first riot I witnessed.) It got plenty of coverage in the national press, being on the front pages with extra coverage inside. I can't think of any other proper riots as such, but there were people disrupting coubcil meetings etc. in the leadup to the implementation of the poll tax. --Peter cohen 15:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other poll tax riots 

message: This is just to call attention to the editor and wikipedia that the opening line's "Poll Tax Riots" is being coopted by some 'rewards' organization.  If I switch from "Talk" to "Article", "Poll Tax" is underlined as a link.  Not sure how to stop this, but it seems widespread on the net these days. Actually having a link to the wiki article referred to by 'mais oui' above would be welcome. William Hoffman (talk) 19:27, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coopting your pages? 

message: This is one of the worst most bias articles lacking sources and pushing POV I have seen on wikipedia in a long time and lacks reliable sources,
Cite:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/31/newsid_2530000/2530763.stm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-battle-of-trafalgar-square-the-poll-tax-riots-revisited-1926873.html
http://www.pearsonschoolsandfecolleges.co.uk/Secondary/History/EBaccsupport/EdexcelGCSEHistoryBSHP/Samples/PollTaxProtestResources/SamplepagesfromCrimeandProtestStudentBook.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mala4_ElCcE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cg9vLczx_B8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YydWLjL7pqE
After viewing the Community charge article I do not see the reason for this article, its title is wrong, news reports stated this was a Demonstration not a riot so the articles title is wrong.
--Pennine rambler (talk) 04:23, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  neutrality 

message: The article claims that Major announced the Council Tax in his first speech as PM. Are we sure this is true? Hezza conducted a review (in which the LibDems participated; Labour declined to do so). He initially announced "I wule nothing out, I wule nothing in". He then announced, some time in the spring, that the poll tax was to be replaced. (I remember the cheer from the Labour benches at the word "replaced").
Surely Major had made a few other speeches in the meantime?Paulturtle (talk) 05:43, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major's first speech