Talk:Andy McNab

message: Could of sworn and by his own admission in a book that Andy grew up in Catford NOT Peckham.   Its quite funny reading about his sojourn in schools as I myself managed to get expelled and permanently excluded from every Bromley senior school and a couple junior schools as well, Andy went on to become a soldier... I went on to become the source material for Trevor out of Made in Britain, us south Londoner's certainly know how to shake the world one way or the other.
92.31.49.54 (talk) 11:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peckham 

message: Agree with previous comment.
"no more than several casualties, if any at all" is ambiguous at the very least.
Actually, it is poor writing. Strike "if any at all".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.184.81.7 (talk) 03:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange choice of words 

message: Quote:
"Due to the extremely sensitive nature of his work with the SAS, Andy McNab is the only author who has to submit his fiction to the British Ministry of Defense for review, and he is still wanted by a number of the world's terrorist organizations. He is therefore forbidden to reveal either his face or his current location. 
These last claims appear difficult to believe. Numerous other former SAS members, including Chris Ryan, Johnny "Two Combs" Howard and Shaun Clarke have also published fiction, with Ryan having also participated in the Bravo Two Zero patrol. Chris Ryan, and the former US Navy SEAL Richard Marcinko, are public figures with media careers, Ryan regularly appearing on television, most notably utilising his skills on one of Derren Brown's psychic stunt shows."
This part of the article says that Chris Ryan are a public figure, but if you click on the link [] and read his Wikipedia entry it states: "It should be noted that Chris Ryan is a pseudonym."
I rest my case
--Reddox 09:43, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Read above and on Chris Ryan's wikipedia page, it says it IS a pseudonym, but yes differently he is openly public and his real name is clearly published. Also, apparently he has just gotten married to a work colleague of my sister... I can't help thinking that it's some dodgy bloke from Hereford saying that he is McNab...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.6.244.121 (talk) 11:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

text: Indeed he does, and I'm fairly sure McNab once appeared as a Newsnight guest (subject the role of disabled men/women in the forces).  I think the business of never showing your face etc. is overdone; retired SAS blokes crop up on tv all the time.  "he is still wanted by a number of the world's terrorist organizations. He is therefore forbidden to reveal either his face or his current location." I'm not sure about that - as a writer doesn't he do book signings? Hakluyt bean 03:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I see one major flaw in the critick 

message: Michael Asher in "The Real Bravo Two Zero" claims that the passenger in a taxi hijacked by McNab knew McNab's real name................... if you ever have any idea of his real name you never release it, however right or wrong you may be, MCNAB is a pseudonym for a reason. he has done wonders for the forces and this should be respected, 
Thanyou
Johnny
: Well, I don't know about the immediately above, but the reason some SAS authors use pseudonyms is marketing.  Peter Ratcliffe for example doesn't.  Hakluyt bean 00:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: McNab's use of a pseudonym for 'security reasons'

message: Is it me or does this article seem as though it could've been lifted directly from a fansite? As it contains more 'weasel words' than references, this article is quite vapid. Probably a result of 'Brand McNab' no doubt. SlopingFlange (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fansite? 

message: I decided to add an image to the article, but it's made it completely messed up! I'm really sorry, all I wanted to do was help and I've ruined it. Please, somebody help me!
Dibship (talk) 12:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am really sorry... 

message: The most highly decorated patrol since the Boer War, the truly heroic exploits of the Bravo Two Zero patrol have been recognised the world over...
Is this supposed to be facts? Sounds more like military propaganda.
It should definately be put another way. Also, many people the world over believe engaging is military actions is wrong. The statement should be neutral, or quote a specific source.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.224.159.186 (talk) 05:07, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Truly Heroic" 

message: How come there is nothing in this article about "Andy Mcnab" being labelled a fraud by his RSM, section members from B-20 and the author of the book; The Real Bravo Two Zero?
Because this is effectively a fansite which doesn't allow criticism of their 'hero', however truthful or provable. You'll soon get deleted if you try, but good luck anyway.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.84.143.73 (talk) 10:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fake? 

message: Is it just me or is the second half of the first paragraph a bit confusing?  It mentions someone named "McElvenna" without previously introducing or describing him, and it doesn't explain any sort of direct relationship with the content of the article.  I can only assume that "McElvenna" was purportedly among the group of IRA terrorists that McNab's patrol encountered.  I suppose that "their contact" as used in McNab's quote refers to the engagement between McNab's patrol and the IRA group, but I don't understand why his quote about the army's (British army) assumption is used unless it is meant to show why McNab believed he had killed for the first time after being presented evidence that showed his victim survived the attack.
I am guessing these few sentences are together intended to present McNab's claim of the first time he killed and to present evidence proving (?) otherwise.
Unmotivate 20:23, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military career - First paragraph clarification 

message: I see that this has been reinstated having been previously removed on 30 August by User:ACatharina, the source being given being a specific page in Michael Asher's 2003. However, it seems that only his first name from this source was used until the middle and surname were added by anon IP 24.137.38.138 the day before. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for catching that; I'd intended to restore from the version that contained only his first name, but copied from the wrong version by mistake. — Matt Crypto 07:31, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  McNab's "real name" 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:06, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:SasclothBadge.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: The argument made earlier in this talk page  is pretty solid yet it seems a small group of editors keep on reverting any mention of his real name or linking of his real name to this article. He is even listed twice in List of former Special Air Service personnel under his real and fake name, which is patently absurd. I even found a source mentioning his real name  (ok we can ditch the middle name I guess) Why are some people so intent on hiding this fact and reverting/issuing warnings over it? It's pretty pathetic. 
The only reason I first came to this article was to find the guys real name, which wasn't made immediately clear until I read the talk page and did some googling. Then when I tried to add his name to this article and to the Bravo Two Zero article and to link his real name to the Andy McNab page on the List of British gallantry awards for Operation Granby page I got shut down and after reverting that fact I get threatened with a ban for vandalising! 
So instead of invoking the wrath of those wrapped up in the bureaucracy of Wikipedia any further I'll just vent my spiel here about this madness and walk away, I hope some people can come to see some sort of sense.  
(And for the record I have no opinions on the man, his books or TV adaptations and the reasons for using a pen-name and hiding his face on TV/Photos, I was just genuinely curious about his real name, something which I thought the Free Internet Encyclopaedia that anyone can Edit could help me with, apparently not. )  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.49.84 (talk) 20:22, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you've read all the previous discussions, you'll see that the central issue was the lack of any reliable source explicitly giving McNab's real name. People putting two and two together by cross-referencing different sources for components of the information (e.g. the London Gazette) is classed as original research, which is absolutely not allowed, and all the circumstantial evidence in the world won't cut it. There are plenty of places where the two names appear together, but previously there was not clear linkage that "Andy McNab is [whoever]." All that said, it seems that the Guardian reference has passed everybody by, and may actually be acceptable, but given the history it really needs discussing here first. Nick Cooper (talk) 21:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The Guardian is certainly considered a reliable source for topics such as this. Is anyone going to argue against including his real name in the article now? – Smyth\talk 13:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

text: Done. – Smyth\talk 17:18, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

text: I know this has been discussed at length but the Guardian article doesn't appear to state his real name. Although his name is mentioned elsewhere, they all seem to be blogs or websites unsuitable for WP:BLPSOURCES as such I removed the name until a consensus can be reached, either on here or through WP:BLPN.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buechlein (talk • contribs) 10:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article did include his real name and it is Steven Mitchell.  The online article was edited on 19 November 2014 and the name mysteriously disappeared.  However, the Internet Archive version remains the same , and the version in the Infotrac datbase remains as a copy of the print version, and it clearly states his name (which is Steven Mitchell).  Printed copies in libraries remain as they were printed.  This is corroborated by the London Gazette medals and books on the B20 patrol.  Le petit fromage (talk) 17:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just checking back in on this. As I previously mentioned, the current version of the Guardian article does not include the name - if The Guardian has removed the name, I think it stands to reason that it should not be published on this page. Other than that article, I don’t think there is a source that complies with WP:BLPSOURCES that isn’t original research.  Whilst printed copies do remain the same, the cited article no longer contains the name. As such, and as there is still a lack of consensus on the name, I have removed it from the page. Buechlein (talk) 15:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  "no sources" - apart from history books cited elsewhere (including in the B20 article).  And I don't know how to put this again, but I'll say it again regardless: The Guardian edited their article.  The original can be found if you know where to look (internet archive, Gale databases, print versions), but it's not the only source by any means.  Le petit fromage (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

text:  The Internet Archive is a reliable source for what the Guardian originally published. More independent sources would be good, so if editors are aware of history books giving the name, please add them to the article. – Smyth\talk 13:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  His real name 

message: Hello, Just been taking a nosey at this article and I can't find where the Guardian article mentions his real name and I can't find a source for his date of birth either? ツStacey (talk) 22:27, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I know this has been discussed at length but the Guardian article doesn't appear to state his real name. Although his name is mentioned elsewhere, they all seem to be blogs or websites unsuitable for WP:BLPSOURCES as such I removed the name until a consensus can be reached, either on here or through WP:BLPN.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buechlein (talk • contribs) 10:57, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article did include his real name and it is Steven Mitchell.  The online article was edited on 19 November 2014 and the name mysteriously disappeared.  However, the Internet Archive version remains the same , and the version in the Infotrac datbase remains as a copy of the print version, and it clearly states his name (which is Steven Mitchell).  Printed copies in libraries remain as they were printed.  This is corroborated by the London Gazette medals and books on the B20 patrol.  Le petit fromage (talk) 17:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just checking back in on this. As I previously mentioned, the current version of the Guardian article does not include the name - if The Guardian has removed the name, I think it stands to reason that it should not be published on this page. Other than that article, I don’t think there is a source that complies with WP:BLPSOURCES that isn’t original research.  Whilst printed copies do remain the same, the cited article no longer contains the name. As such, and as there is still a lack of consensus on the name, I have removed it from the page. Buechlein (talk) 15:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  "no sources" - apart from history books cited elsewhere (including in the B20 article).  And I don't know how to put this again, but I'll say it again regardless: The Guardian edited their article.  The original can be found if you know where to look (internet archive, Gale databases, print versions), but it's not the only source by any means.  Le petit fromage (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

text:  The Internet Archive is a reliable source for what the Guardian originally published. More independent sources would be good, so if editors are aware of history books giving the name, please add them to the article. – Smyth\talk 13:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  One year later 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Andy McNab. 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/20120223224414/http://www.robmcgibbon.com/resources/pcw_andy_mcnab.pdf/ to http://www.robmcgibbon.com/resources/pcw_andy_mcnab.pdf
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) 19:25, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified