Talk:Gordon Brown/Archive 2

message: The 'Personal' section of the article says about Mrs. Brown, "The men's adult magazine Playboy has even reportedly tried to entice her to pose for their publication. She is unlikely to do so" and gives ref #48. That reference does not contain anything even close to that statement. Please re-check, and if necessary, remove the line in the article. Thanks.
128.46.190.247 22:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Playboy? 

message: center|thumb
Something about this made me laugh. VarunRajendran 19:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ha Ha 

message: I removed the flag from this article's info-box, as this is a needless and redundant feature, as well as being divisive. Brown is certainly a Scot, but he is also an avowed Unionist. Should he have the saltire or the Union Jack? My solution is neither. See WP:FLAG for an interesting essay on this subject. --Guinnog 17:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As he is the PM of the United Kingdom, the official flag of the UK should be the one to include in the article, if any.  – AMK1211talk! 15:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag 

message: BBC News 24 has just (19:55 BST) hello dave that Brown has secured 308 nominations for Labour Leader, and hence he does not have to go through the election process - he will be the UK's next Prime Minister. 86.136.194.102 19:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gordon secures 308 nominations 

message: I put Prime Minister-elect information into the infobox (edit info) but this was swiftly reverted and a message was put at the top of the page saying that there is "no such title" in United Kingdom politics. This term is being used on the BBC, Sky News, ITV and by several MPs, Brown is clearly the Prime Minister-elect, why not call him what he clearly is? Hera1187 16:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not just that there's no such title. It's a misleading way of describing it, because the Prime Minister is not an elected office. PMs are selected by the Queen from Parliament. Sure, in modern times the Queen has only ever had one choice, but until quite recently there were times (in the 1950s and 60s) when it was not a clear cut decision - so the power is still there. It remains the technical truth that she makes the appointment. Maybe that's peculiar but WP must reflect it anyway! ¶ 21:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Correct, there is no constitutional position of Prime Minister-elect.  Instead when I changed a part of the introduction, I put in "leader-designate" of the Labour Party, in which he is.  Afterall he is the only canditate to secure enough nominations from Labour Party MPs. (Stephennarmstrong 16:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prime Minister-elect 

message: Is it a good idea for Brown's signature to be available on this page? What do others think? Dewarw 11:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok, but if I were on Wikipedia, famous or not famous, I would not want my signature freely available! Dewarw 16:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't he use a different signature for things like his bank account? I thought what we have is more of an autograph--Ruddyell 18:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Can we conform that other UK PM's have the same? I agree that it would be the height of silliness to try to empty Brown's bank account as it wouldnt exactly fail to attract interest but all the same Dewarw may have a point re WP:BLP, SqueakBox 18:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

text: *Tony Blair, John Major and Margaret Thatcher all have signatures on their pages, as does every US President. --Philip Stevens 06:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should, therefore, we remove signatures from all these pages? Dewarw 19:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should keep it. There's plenty of stupid things in the infobox (like putting his age in brackets and alma mater)but this isn't one of them. Hundreds of people whove seen GB must go up to him and ask for his autograph (I know hes not a pop star)and he'll give it to them even if he's got no idea who they are.--Ruddyell 10:40, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signature 

message: I have enlarged this section on Gordon Brown's personal life. I felt the previous section was far too minimal for a politician of his stature and so have added a lot more detailed information about Gordon Brown the man as opposed to Gordon Brown the politician and the personal factors that make him tick. Ivankinsman 11:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life 

message: The main picture we are using is dated from 2000, and he's changed quite a bit since then.  is from 2004 and I think its more in line with pictures of other PMs, but every time I've put it up it's been replaced. There is another portrait on commons which is dodgily sourced, so would anyone agree the 2004 one is better?--Ruddyell 10:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main picture 

message: I've butchered this section - it was really scrappy. I cut this bit:
:Private Eye's "Born to be Queenie" portrays a satirical sexual relationship between Blair and Brown. However, Brown denied being homosexual when he appeared on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs:
::Gordon Brown was shadow chancellor when the presenter Sue Lawley asked: "People want to know whether you're gay or whether there's some flaw in your personality that you haven't made a relationship."Media Guardian, Lawley to cast away from Desert Island Discs, April 13 2006  Accessed 27 October 2006 ''
... because what's the point? The Eye ref is a random obscure joke, and the fact that he denied being gay (not even quoted anyway) seems pretty irrelevant given he later got married and has plenty of former girlfriends, etc. 
I then moved the Shilpa stuff to the Chancellor role, since they are things he has done and this section should be about how he is portrayed in the media. I also moved the George Martin fact, although frankly I think it's pretty irrelevant but then so is are quite a few bits of this article now. 
The result is that there's actually only one fact about Brown in the media, which seems a shame as this could be a good overview of how he has been praised, criticised and generally portrayed over the past 10 years... Hence moving it to the end, tweaking the title, and adding a stubmark. ¶ 12:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brown in the media 

message: Could a sysop add something to the first sentence? … is the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the United Kingdom since 2 June 1997 and the leader of the Labour Party since 24 June 2007. It currently looks like he's been Chancellor since 24 June 2007 as well. 82.212.57.119 16:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 

message: According to a BBC Reporting Scotland news report tonight (25 June), Brown was born not in Giffnock but Govan; also see  and . Keeno 17:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birthplace 

message: I know it's a current event and he becomes Prime Minister today, but would semi-protection not suffice?--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 08:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reduction to semi-protection requested – Gurch 10:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've unprotected it completely, would semi be better do you think? Ryan Postlethwaite 10:18, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, we'll soon see, won't we? – Gurch 12:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this page fully protected? 

message: I'm not familiar with politics of the UK, but the infobox title still says he is a MP - member of parliament. Should this the changed to Prime Minister? --ST47Talk 14:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, all Prime Ministers are also Members of parliament. If you are not familiar with british politics then don't change anything! Abc30 14:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Already answered and this will get long enough! Duke of Whitstable 14:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[MP]]? 

message: I'm unhappy at leaving this semi-protected for too long, would anyone have any problems removing the semi protection to see how we get on? Ryan Postlethwaite 14:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problems with that. never saw any vandaism before the protection but was only here twice. Wardhog 23:43, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotection 

message: Isn't his full, official name The Rt Hon Dr James Gordon Brown - which should at least appear in the info-box title, surely? Though it might not fit well, due to the length. Also, no-one has changed where he was born, mentioned above, which in the article appears to be wrong. The top section should be longer and give more of an overview of his career and acheivements. 195.137.30.238 14:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally "Dr" isn't included whether the person is often called "Dr" - see Jack Cunningham - or not - see John Redwood. However John Reid (politician) does have it, though I suspect this is a recent addition. Timrollpickering 14:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If he were to reference his doctorate, wouldn't he more likely do so as The Rt Hon Gordon Brown PhD (or whatever the appropriate postnominals are)? A 'Rt Hon' seems to displace the more "common" prenominal titles, e.g. Mr.   Petecollier 23:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I think it's highly unusual to spell it out in full. Kevin Judson 11:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Gordon Brown was born in the City of Glasgow, in the Govan area,  Not Giffnock.  Otherwise the more crediblie than this website, the BBC's sources are incorrect.
:I've no idea of the details of this but is it possible someone's confusing where his parents lived when he was born with the location of the maternity hospital where his mother gave birth? It is quite common for the two to get mixed up, especially as many people regard the location of maternity units as irrelevant to whether or not they are from a place "by birth". Timrollpickering 15:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of birth 

message: Parts of this are a copyvio from . I don't have time to fix it; can someone else do it? --Rory096 21:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not withouit much more specific info, eg a sentence or phrase from the paper that is reproduced int he article, SqueakBox 21:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Did it myself. Nearly the entire article was copied. --Rory096 14:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio 

message: Since Law has been added more then once to the footnote list I'll explain my reasons for reversion. (Also can I ask anyone changing anything on this subject to post here as the huge number of edits on the article makes it hard to follow the edit summaries.)
I have one of the most recent short biographies of Law here - Andrew Taylor Bonar Law in the series "The 20 British Prime Ministers of the 20th Century", (London; Haus Publishing, 2006). Page 4 has the following:
:Law did not attend university... [H]e attended early-morning lectures at Gasgow University before work. His autodidacticisim was, like business, a means to an end: a political career.
Since it directly addresses his "attendance" at Glasgow I think it's clear that Law was a memer of the public taking advantage of the university's service to the community and not an enrolled/matriculated student. Timrollpickering 15:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Andrew Bonar Law and University

message: Brothers and awards???  I think this should be split into two separate sections.  They are totally unrelated items.  Robinson weijman 06:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done- I renamed "Married life" to "Family", incorporating the brother information and moved the honorary degrees to the university section. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 10:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, thanks. Robinson weijman 10:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange Title 

message: There's a discussion at Talk:Sarah Macaulay as to what the article should be titled as she doesn't use her maiden name but isn't the only well known Sarah Brown. Timrollpickering 18:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wife's name 

message: Should the 'MP' suffix be included in his name in the infobox? Looking at the pages for other members of the new cabinet, some have the 'MP' included and some don't. I just added it to the Jacqui Smith article, but then realised that many other cabinet members have the 'The Rt Hon' but not the 'MP' (Alan Johnson, John Reid, etc). What is the wikipedia policy on this? Abc30 21:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP suffix in infobox 

message: Is the term administration, as in the Brown/Blair administration an appropriate term for a British government, (compare to Bush/Clinton administration for example) as I've noticed it written like that a few times on various pages? Burto88 01:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah it's ok really. It's definitely an americanism and it's not used officially, but many users on here are american so the can use whatever words they want. Either way as long as it's clear what it means it's fine. Abc30 02:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Abc30 - 'Administration' is predeominantly AE usage, but it's readily understandable to a BE reader. I'd say the more typical BE expression would just be 'Government', as in 'the Blair Government, the Heath Government' etc. 'Administration' to me smacks of a presidential system - which some would argue was how the former PM was trying to to run things anyway!  Petecollier 08:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The tendency is (or at least always used to be) towards "Blair ministry"... DBD 11:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Mrs Thatcher frequently used the word "administration", notably e.g. when she greeted the crowds (of reporters) after becoming PM in 1979.--Camptown 14:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Administration or Government? 

message: Forget it its gone...
:That would have been vandalism.--NeoNerd 21:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yep, I yanked it. Angus Lepper(T, C, D) 22:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE Gordon Brown? 

message: The part Personal life is a copy of http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/09/nrgordon109.xml. Maximini1010 04:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I got most of it- now to find out who did it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 12:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, it was User:Ivankinsman . Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 12:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio 

message: What's that sketch of GB "a day or two" after he became PM in the article for? It looks terrible!--Ruddyell 10:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here to say just that, very unencyclopedic, no matter how humorous :p 213.48.15.234 11:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I've justthis minute removed it! regards, Lynbarn 11:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The main image isn't much better- he looks like a fish! I think we should generally avoid images where he has his mouth open as they tend to be unflattering - this image imo is the best one:Image:Gordon Brown portrait.jpg. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 13:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dodgy sketch 

message: Now that Gordo is PM, we should cut all the rambling stuff that accrued over his time as Chancellor. This article is very long already, and he hasn't even done anything yet! As a first step I've created a new article wherein all the rambling stuff has been dumped. And I call on all good Wikipedians to summarise Gordon Brown's ten years as the country's second-most powerful man into a couple of taut paragraphs, while perhaps even developing the Chancellor gubbins in its new home. ¶ 11:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GB as Chancellor 

message: Can we get one that doesn't make him look mildly drooling, dizzy, and confused? 
Please! FT2 (Talk | email) 23:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I am going to replace it with this one :Image:Gordon Brown portrait.jpg - every one where he has his mouth open he looks like he's about to swallow a fly. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Image:Gordon Brown portrait.jpg is bad for two reasons. 1, it doesn't even look like him and 2, he looks quite disturbed/insecure. :Image:Gordon Brown smiles.jpg has a better composition and I beleve it looks more like him (despite the fact that it is older than the current). MartinHagberg 10:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I think the current one is slightly the best, I don't see how he looks insecure, but he does seem to look different now which is why I liked :Image:GordonBrown2004.JPG because it showed more grey hairs. Maybe that image was better before it was cropped though because the hand gesture made him look like he was making a point, instead of looking like he'd just seen a busty blonde--Ruddyell 13:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that :Image:GordonBrown2004.JPG is the 'best' photo currently available, but it seems that the open mouth is disturbing to some people (which I don't really understand). A full size version of GordonBrown2004.JPG becomes unclear when it is minimized and most biography 'lead images' are cropped like that. MartinHagberg 13:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Because it's copyrighted, probably. Abc30 16:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A google image search has yeilded some possible pictures that are a little nicer. It doesn't help that Mr Brown doesnt seem to be very naturally photogenic, and so half of his photos look rather demonic, or he has his mouth open (although I can't personally see why this is a problem). Are we sure the number10.gov.uk is copyrighted? it might not be, it may be royalty free headshot. WikipedianProlific(Talk) 21:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Most of the images on number10.gov.uk are shown as copyright Reuters Regards, Lynbarn 21:56, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: Currently the section on Brown as PM precedes that on his time as Chancellor in the article... surely this should be rearranged so that his history is chronological? -Kez 14:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure 

message: Is the Newsround reference really good enough? There were rumours that Brown had a glass eye back to 1999 at least so it's possible that the mother wrote to Brown thinking he had a glass eye but Brown in fact doesn't but he wanted to give give the kid some confidence so he went along with it and pretended he did have a glass eye? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 13:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. Have to say I wasn't totally happy with referencing a Newsround story.  However, two points.  Firstly, with it being the BBC, I think we can assume a fairly good level of reliablilty.  Secondly, are you suggesting that a handwritten letter from Brown himself admitting the fact (and talking directly of its impact on his life) is insufficient proof?  Short of a doctor's certificate, I can't see what better proof there could be.  Kevin Judson 14:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, yes, that IS possible, but the reference, as cited, is from a reliable source (The BBC), and unless and until your theory can be substantiated, I would say leave it as is. One also has to consider the likelihood of a leading British politician committing an untruth, however well meant, to the public domain, and in particular, in writing.(!!!) I have also found several 'circumstantial' references, rumours, and suggestions, but nothing definitive either way. Regards, Lynbarn 14:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be more of a white lie on Brown's part as he would obviously think by saying he did have a glass eye he would make the kid's life better. Probably only Brown's close family and doctor know whether he actually has a glass eye or not. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 15:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As Lynbarn said, when there's no evidence to support a lie, we really have to presume he's telling the truth.  If this was such a white lie, as you suggest it could be, it would be highly unusual and ill-advised (since when does a politian put in writing something they know to be untrue and probably verifiably so?).  He's not going to invent a whole story about having a glass eye for one mother's letter.  Kevin Judson 16:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Have to agree with Lynbarn and Kevin Judson there, but if you want to know if newsround tells white lies, find out their policy on santa claus--Ruddyell 22:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to update this item, I work for the wife of a labour back-bencher, who in conversation this morning did confirm that he does have a glass eye. I guess this counts as original research though! Lynbarn 11:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glass eye ref 

message: Is it too early to start one? For the Labour Party to be taking on Digby Jones ex-director of the Bosses Federation the CBI seems to be a good place to start.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 14:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism Section 

message: I removed the tag saying the lead is not long enough, because when you clicked on it, it just went to the talk page and hadn't been discussed beforehand.  The lead does need to be longer now.--Gloriamarie 15:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead not long enough 

message: I removed the last two tenets of the policies section because they were cut and pastes from the first reference given, from the Times.--Gloriamarie 15:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed I came across one in an article where it had stayed for a year or more with a fair amount of work done on it. Other then the fact that it was taken from lawyers so was a very high risk for legal action, all that work came to naught because the section had to be removed Nil Einne 14:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violations in policies section 

message: Mr Brown is a unionist man that seems to think he is English and he should be barred from Scotland for being so uncaring of Scotland like the rest of the UK's government is.
VOTE SNP
:Oddly, they don't have a candidate in my constituency, what with me not living in Scotland. 64.236.80.62
::Please only use this page to discuss improvements to the article; it is not a place to express general political opinions. Lfh 11:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Mr Brown a stubborn man? 

message: The opening sentence reads 'Dr. James Gordon Brown (born 20 February 1951) is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, the First Lord of the Treasury, the Minister for the Civil Service and the Leader of the Labour Party, and was first appointed to these duties on 27 June 2007'
However, as stated later in the article, 'he formally became Leader of the Labour party at a special Party Conference held in Manchester on 24 June' - then assumed the Government offices 3 days later.
Am I right about this? Surely we should get the opening sentence right?!
Brianwilsonisgod 21:35, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are, we should, and I have. -- Arwel (talk) 21:48, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracy on date of becoming Labour Party Leader 

message: If anybody wonders why the title "Dr. Gordon Brown" is not being used here, please look at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28biographies%29#Academic_titles.  Thanks, Lfh 10:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dr title 

message: Does being blind in one eye count as a disability ? If so, he could fit in the Politicians with physical disabilities category. Wedineinheck 11:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He doesn't drive does he? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 13:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok, thanks. :) Wedineinheck 16:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disability ? 

message: If this page is protected and can only be altered by administrators how come the lines concerning his mother and father keep on changing - variously saying his father 'molested' him and his mother's nickname was 'Slutty'. Slightly childish no? 
86.141.2.126 12:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Protection only means that editors without accounts or new members cant make changes to articles, some people have created accounts and so they can purposefully vandalise the project despite the protection. Gavin Scott 13:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected? 

message: Henry Campbell-Bannerman was a graduate of Glasgow University, he should be added to the lsit of PMs not eucated at an Oxbridge College. DKBick  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.70.154.130 (talk) 14:37, August 23, 2007 (UTC) 
:See above - the key point is which university educated PMs didn't go to Obridge, not those who went to both one of them and another university. Timrollpickering 14:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PMs not from Oxon or Cams 

message: Why does this need a special section? Furthermore, surely any reference to jewish roots of his minsters belongs in their own biographies. Why would it have any relevance to a views on israel section?
dfutter  —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 11:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Views on Israel 

message: Anyone want to add something about this? Dannpm 12:45, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fashion 

message: Anyone think this deserves a mention? (Willieboyisaloser 14:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe, if it is properly sourced. I'm not sure that your user name is appropriate. Who is this "Willieboy"? Viewfinder 16:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, which Tory ideas does Willieboyisaloser have in mind?Phase4 19:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Brown is not just a Tory but a Thatcherite just as Blair was before him. There is no substantial difference between him and Cameron.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 08:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brown stealing Tories ideas 

message: Something wired is happening. I'm trying to revert recent vandalism, but my edit isn't taking. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:31, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: There's currently a disturbance at the current Canadian prime minister's article, Stephen Harper, regarding the inclusion of the head of state in the article's infobox, and, following that, on all previous Canadian prime ministers' articles; currently the Canadian series is the only one, as far as I can tell, where the relevant head of state is not listed in the infobox.
As this article, and all those for previous British prime ministers, list the head of state in the infobox, I'm wondering how the decision to do so was reached, and if this practice should or should not be the same for all PMs' articles. It seems odd to me that one series of PM articles would be different to all the rest.
Opinions are welcome; needed actually. The discussion is taking place at Talk:Stephen Harper#Infobox -- include GG and monarch?. --G2bambino 15:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why all PM's in all countries need the exact same infobox. The monarch technically appoints the Prime Minister and in the early days of the British premiership the monarch had considerable influence over who was appointed PM so I think it's an important part of the British PM infobox—British PMs still go to "kiss hands" at Buckingham Palace. Canadian and Australian PM infoboxes will differ because of the strong republican feeling in those countries and because when they started having PM's they were already constitutional monarchies with the monarch having no influence in the appointment.--Johnbull 17:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the succession to the Premiership of Alex Douglas Home, and the first General Election of 1974, I'd suggest the monarch still holds significant influence over who to appoint - if only in certain circumstances Whitstable (talk) 17:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Home was appointed before the Conservatives had formal leadership elections. And the monarch didn't appoint anyone in February 1974 - Heath did not resign his office (and constitutionally there was no requirement to - the Commons had not yet voted him out and it wasn't clear if he could or couldn't form a government). Remember Heath left Downing Street in less time after the election than many Prime Ministers do in clear cut results, both in the UK (e.g. Baldwin in 1929) or elsewhere in the world (right now John Howard is still the Australian PM, Kevin Rudd won't become so until later in the week). Timrollpickering (talk) 18:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Head of state in infobox 

message: What is Gordon Brown's view on Zimbabwe?
– He thinks it's lovely, and would like to go there on holiday. He hears the exchange rate is rather good at the moment, too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.189.169.182 (talk) 10:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zimbabwe? 

message: There should be a link to http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Category:Gordon_Brown --81.105.245.251 23:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikinews 

message: Can anyone confirm that the signature in the article is really Gordon Brown's signature? It doesn't really look like the kind of signature that an adult would use. UKWikiGuy (talk) 19:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be taken from this page at the Labour website. There's actually another (less messy-looking) signature at this page but it would probably need to be changed into a PNG or SVG to be used here (no idea how to do that myself, alas). Chwech 19:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I can well believe that it is Brown's signature.  He lost much of his eyesight in an accident, and it is entirely plausible that that would have affected his handwriting in that kind of way. TJ (talk) 16:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't think of that. I assumed that as the image was released under the GFDL it was self made. I think I will raise the issue of the image not being free on the image page UKWikiGuy (talk) 23:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signature 

message: Can we get a date of birth on this page? Brown was born on 20 February 1951. 79.73.7.33 (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the infobox.  Mr Stephen (talk) 22:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DOB 

message: A debate over the inclusion of the monarch in the infoboxes of Canadian prime ministers, similar to what is done here and at all other British PM articles, has re-emerged at Talk:Stephen Harper#Re-open discussion: Infobox -- include GG and monarch?. Opinions on the matter are welcome, if not necessary! --G2bambino (talk) 03:14, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monarch in infobox 

message: Is that really Brown's signature? It looks totally retarded, the way you would expect a five year old to sign their name.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.158.114 (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gorden Brown's signature 

message: I think that it should be mentioned in the opening paragraph that Gordon Brown was not elected into his position and merely Tony Blair's successor. 82.41.15.93 (talk) 00:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He was elected. We all knew he would succeed Blair. Gavin Scott (talk) 12:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In 1992, oh and thats a very inadequate answer to give. This may not be the US and we may not directly vote for the leaders of political parties but when your putting your ballot in the box you'll be thinking Brown, Cameron or some other leader- you won't be thinking about your local candidates too much. Gavin Scott (talk) 16:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You should be, thats who your voting for. All PM's are unelected so it shouldn't be mentioned unless put into context eg. he's never lead his party in a general election.(Morcus (talk) 22:52, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Regardless GS, no members of the public voted for Major to become PM in 1990 when Thatcher left. --Revolt (talk) 19:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Elected 

message: Is there a reason for this article not existing?  David Cameron has this article, and they're normally very useful for quickly referring to political positions... --87.194.236.208 (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Positions of Gordon Brown 

message: There is currently a statement in this article that Brown doesn't have a driving licence. How is the webpage cited in any way an authoritative source on the matter? What a joke of an encyclopaedia Wikipedia sometimes reveals itself to be in its acceptance of anything as a reliable source. You have a policy on this, why not stick to it? 79.68.246.120 (talk) 19:18, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have replaced the citation with one to a 2001 Sunday Times article.  Thank you for your input.  Mr Stephen (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good stuff, thanks! 79.68.246.120 (talk) 00:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Driving licence 

message: Gold sales: Between 1999 and 2002 Brown sold 60% of the UK's gold reserves at $275 an ounce.[37]
I'd raise a question about this source as when I click the link for [37] no page exists so the price of $275 per troy ounce can not be verified. I have the figure as being slightly lower at $250. It would be interesting to see what the figure really is as these Gold Sales were staged over a period of 2 years and sold on different dates it would be good to see an authoritive source detailing all the sale quantities, their dates, and the exchange rate on those dates so we can obtain a true average. John10001 (talk) 19:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI: ref 37 at www.archive.org.  Mr Stephen (talk) 20:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute whether details correct on Gold Sale 

message: Perhaps fitting with the rest of the article, the current top image is out of date and just not very good. Does anyone think an image like this:  cc photo may be better? obviously it would need cropping --RedMe (talk) 12:17, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main picture 

message: Mugabe called Gordon Brown a "little tiny dot on the world" on Saturday 12th April 2008.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.185.111 (talk) 22:13, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zimbabwean Elections 

message: This section currently states Gordon Brown does not possess a driving licence. - According to this Telegraph blog post he does indeed possess one. Neither source seems more credible than the other (both political comment pieces in major national newspapers) but given the uncertainty shouldn't this claim be removed? Qwghlm (talk) 15:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure this should have been included in the article to begin with. It just seems to be a small piece of unimportant trivia to me. Having said that,  and  both back up the claim however I still don't believe it's noteworthy enough to be on the page.137.222.215.52 (talk) 14:59, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've not thought about it before, but I agree, it isn't relevent to the article, so it is now no more... regards, Lynbarn (talk) 15:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Driving licence 

message: Can we rewrite this to simply "British", or will the Scotch nationalists cause a furore? I'm not being a pedant, it's just that any other politician who happens to be of English origin, is simply referred to as British. Case in point, Tony Blair, Tessa Jowell, David Milliband. 92.232.121.101 (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  British (Scottish)? 

message: 80.42.233.163 (talk) 19:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you - well spotted --h2g2bob (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gordon Brown 

message: This article seems to be written with a negative bias against the prime minister.  Could it not be written in a more neutral tone?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.75.13 (talk) 22:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not at the moment!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simon k phillips (talk • contribs) 17:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I somewhat agree with the above comment. I can't see the section be written in a more neutral tone at the moment, because that is the truth. w_tanoto (talk) 21:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Controversy sections are discouraged as it splits articles into positive and negative sections. Unregistered users currently cannot edit the page (register here), but suggestions on what can be improved (on this page) will be welcome. If you have a specific change you want to make, suggest it here with the text . --h2g2bob (talk) 16:59, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: Can someone add the fact that he has been called the Iron Chancellor on numerous occasions?
References:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3545669.stm
http://www.google.co.uk/search?num=100&hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Iron+chancellor%22+%22gordon+brown%22&btnG=Search&meta=
81.149.182.210 (talk) 00:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Iron Chancellor 

message: "Brown made his first overseas trip as Prime Minister not to Washington, but to Berlin, and spoke to German Chancellor Angela Merkel."
ScottAwesome (talk) 11:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of respect shown to our American overlords? 

message: Brown has just turned a 17% labour majority into a 17% tory one.
:I think the 17% related to the "swing", not specifically to the majority (it just so happens that the majority by which the winning candidate won at the by-election happens to be an almost "mirror reversal" of the majority at the last general election — Conservative candidate by about 8,000 votes at the 2008 by-election, Labour candidate by about 7,000 votes at the 2005 general election). Also, I don't think that one can fairly say that Brown "has just turned a ... Labour majority into a ... Tory one" — the responsibility for that change cannot be so simply pin-pointed! Ondewelle (talk) 13:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with Ondewelle. It does not fit to be added to this article. I don't think he is directly responsible. Also, regarding the majority, according to Crewe and Nantwich by-election, 2008 article, the majority is 18.9, while the swing is 17.6. w_tanoto (talk) 22:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crewe by election 

message: The main article notes that "Gordon Brown was depicted in Season 12 of South Park sitting at a table of world leaders opposite Nicolas Sarkozy in the episode 'Canada on Strike'. He was accurately portrayed speaking in an English accent, having long abandoned his native Scottish accent." — That is as may be, but to many English people he still sounds Scottish (though I'll admit his accent is "muted"; it is not, however, an "English accent"). Also, do we know that he has actively chosen to "abandon" his Scottish accent? Might it not simply be that living (effectively) in England for some years and being surrounded largely by English people has meant that his accent has become muted? Ondewelle (talk) 13:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accent 

message: There are two major controversies missing. The first is his raid on pensions. The second is his sale of Britain's gold reserves. They both get a mention under his acts as Chancellor but they are also major controversies. - Berks911 (talk) 07:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversies 

message: What is this dictator nonsense that we are introduced with on Gordon Brown? This should be edited immediately, as it lowers the stature of Wikipedia as a reliable source of information.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.120.235 (talk) 21:49, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dictator rubbish 

message: Does it have a name? I can't follow what he says on the telly, I keep focussing on his mouth. 124.101.249.63 (talk) 00:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The thing he does with his mouth 

message: As stated in the article, Gordon Brown holds a PhD - so should he not have the title 'Dr' at the beginning of the article? There is a Guardian comment piece at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/03/unconstitutionalrubbish that refers to him as such throughout.
Brianwilsonisgod (talk) 16:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's one of the only times I've seen "Dr Brown"... Which is interesting in itself, so do we think it should be noted? DBD 23:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I thought the same thing - we shoudl call him Dr Brown rather than Mr Brown. In cidentally, where is mention of his first degree? The article skips straight from his being accepted at Univeristy at the age of 16 to a Masters in 1972 when he would have been about 21. So presumably in about 1970 he git a first degree. (or have I missed something?) DavidFarmbrough (talk) 22:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In Scottish University the first degree you go for is often a Masters done over four years. Gavin Scott (talk) 17:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The BBC frequently mentioned "Ms Clinton" and continues to mention "Mr Obama" when both hold JDs. Rarely are JDs called doctor, however. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Its a curious thing, I remember Dr. John Reid the former home secretary was very insistent that people use his doctoral title. I also recall the Prime Minister referring to Condoleezza Rice as Dr. Rice...Sometimes the media call him Dr. Brown other times Mr. Brown. It just depends. Gavin Scott (talk) 18:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've heard Rice called "Dr Rice" just as often as "Ms Rice". The simplest thing is just to put PhD after his name or make sure that it's mentioned in the article that he is a PhD. When just mentioning him, drop Mr and Dr, just use Brown. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wiki convention is to put the fact that a person has a doctoral degree in the lead section but not begin the article with Dr. Name. There is a policy on that, I could find it if need be, anyway should there ever be a need in the article to call him Mr. Brown I would recommend using the correct Dr. Brown form, however that being said I don't think there would ever be such an instance, so thus Brown should suffice. Gavin Scott (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. Perhaps you could do something similar to Churchill's page? Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you refer me to the part you mean? If its the fact that the article starts with Sir Winston Churchill, well that meets the WP:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Honorific_titles policy. Gavin Scott (talk) 22:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean at the very beginning with all of his post-nominal medal initials. Are you allowed to do the same with degrees? Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the MoS...no. Gavin Scott (talk) 22:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. Then we just have to make sure it never gets deleted. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Dr' title? 

message: Is his deputy Harman (his deputy in the House of Commons), Darling (who seems to be the next most powerful cabinet minister), Martin (next in precedence for the gentlemen), Ashton (who has a fixed place in the men's precedence despite being a woman) or Straw (the man previously hought to have been given the positions of Deputy PM and/or First Secretary of State)? Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting argument but factually incorrect. She was not chosen to run the country, as No. 10 went at great pains to emphasise that she was just "co-ordinating the government's work" for one week. The argument is further weakened when you consider that both Alistair Darling and Jack Straw were selected to carry out the same role in subsequent weeks. Taking your argument to the logical conclusion it looks like we now have 3 deputies to choose from. ^_~ Road Wizard (talk) 21:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

text: There is a difference between a formal Deputy Prime Minister, a Cabinet member being given an alternate "senior" title (e.g. "First Secretary of State") and one or more ministers minding the shop when the PM is out of town (Harman hasn't been running things all the time - Alistair Darling had a go for a bit but with his ability to bring invisibility to whatever he does it was easy to miss). It's also the case that the Deputy title can very often backfire by making the politician vulnerable when things go wrong - John Prescott would have fared far better at the hands of the press in 2006-7 had he been titled "First Secretary of State & Secretary of State for Communities, Local Government and the Regions" or even just a shorter form. Harold Wilson was deliberate in not giving George Brown the DPM title as this would have made the latter's personal shortcomings even fairer game for the media. Brown has been trying to get away from the "Presidential" style of the Blair Administration and not having a formal deputy is one way of doing so. Timrollpickering (talk) 21:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deputy 

message: Any reason why? Or can't anyone find a non copyrighted Pic? (88.109.100.65 (talk) 21:01, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No pictures of him when he was young. 

message: Current picture looks outdated (photographed in 2004 when he was still Chancellor) so updated photo is greatly needed. Anyone object? Hopwas2007 (talk) 12:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: One thing to consider is that it is important to avoid copyright problems. As the current image is in the public domain you can only replace it with another image in the public domain or an image under an equivalent free licence (See Wikipedia:Non-free content). Road Wizard (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo needs to be updated 

message: Should something be put about the PM's threatened attack or is that against what Wikipedia is? For a more knowledgeable and relaxed Wikipedia- Nemesis646 (talk) 21:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: IF it has credible 3rd party sources then be bold SGGH speak! 19:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assassination plot 

message: I usually stay away from politics and voting as I personally don't believe we live in a true democracy. That said, I am astounded by the negativity on this page. Although not a perfect PM, Brown has had some positive moments; during the horrific floods last year he showed great drive and leadership and, although not perfect, has shown a good deal of purpose on environmental issues. I suggest this article shows more balance instead of just presenting the views of our nation's sensationalist media outlets. Commend Brown on at least something! There's no need to be so negative. It's just a thought- Cheers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.110.42 (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on the eventual outcome. There is a school of thought that if he was so eager to claim responsibility for the out-of-control boom years then how can he avoid any responsibility for the bust? However, if he does manage to get control of the economy again then it could indeed be seen as an overall positive. I would suggest waiting for now and seeing how history judges him. Road Wizard (talk) 22:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the lack of positives? 

message: Do we list such things in wikipedia? Gordon holds many honorary degrees, an example being (from the article Doctor of Letters) the higher doctorate, D.Litt from the university of Delhi--Liamstone (talk) 19:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  (hons) degrees? 

message: The lede needs to be updated - Brown is now more secure in his premiership than ever. The credit crunch has changed events - with labour now 10 points behind their rivals according to most polls (as apposed to 20 points when the lede was written). Browns bank bailout has been internationally hailed as a model; contributing to a far more secure and authoritative PM. Speculation regarding a challenge is non-existant, indeed - it is purely gossip.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.11.195 (talk) 00:07, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've updated the last sentence of the lead para to reflect this.  MFlet1 (talk) 15:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Jw2034, It is very difficult to replace a sitting prime minister, as a poll today shows labour only 3 points behind the conservatives it is clear the crisis in the labour party is over and there will not be a challange to his leadership before the next election. If at the end of the year he is still closing the gap with the tories then there should be a section on labour and Browns turnaround in the polls, with more detail than the paragraph added by Mflet1 (which is good enough for now) BritishWatcher (talk) 09:00, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed circumstances 

message: see http://indefence.is - Gunnar Guðvarðarson (My Talk) 03:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: The article states that the PM gained the votes of a number of Ulster Unionist MPs. There is only one UIster Unionist in the House of Commons and while she did vote with the government I believe that the article shold be referring to the nine Democratic Unionist Party MPs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.125.110 (talk) 22:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error on 42 Day Detention 

message: Perhaps someone who is familiar with this debate (which i am sure has been gone over on several occasions) could direct me to where such debates took place on how to deal with the nationality of British people in the person info box as i have been unable to find it. Some peoples article describe them as British, whilst others describe them as Scottish. Personally i would like to see Scottish and British included rather than just one or the other. I also notice that the info box does allow for the inclusion of "citizenship" which would be British and there for only need to describe his nationality as Scottish. BritishWatcher (talk) 11:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The application of the word British to the nationality of Scottish politicians who serve in the UK government seems to be consistent in Wikipedia; we should keep it that way unless or until there is consensus to do otherwose. Maybe there is a case for further discussion of this, as Scotland is a nation, albeit not a sovereign nation. Viewfinder (talk) 11:29, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Try Wikipedia:Nationality of people from the United Kingdom. The trouble is, there is no verifiable test of whether someone is Scottish or British - it is really a matter of how they see themselves. Certainly, the country of birth is not a valid test. If someone stands for the UK parliament, becomes the PM and presents themselves as the leader of Britain internationally, it is quite good evidence that they see themselves as British, rather than Scottish. Also, if they bang on about "Britshness" (as Brown has done), it gives further evidence. Brown may be ethnically Scots, but I would argue that there is plenty of evidence that his nationality is British.Bluewave (talk) 11:47, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no evidence whatsoever for your "rather than Scottish" statement. Brown clearly considers himself to be both, and AFAIAA has said so repeatedly. Please note that Scottish implies British, however the reverse is not true. --Mais oui! (talk) 11:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK I was putting forward some evidence for Britishness but, if there is evidence for Scottishness too, that's fine. Bluewave (talk) 20:20, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for that link Bluewave, thats what i was looking for and will read that all through later today. Mais, Brown considers himself to be both Scottish and British which is why i would prefer to see both stated as his nationality. I think mentioning both on all such cases would be the best policy as being British doesnt stop him from being just as Scottish as someone like Alex Salmond who i agree should just be labelled Scottish. BritishWatcher (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is what is on his passport: British.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.219.39 (talk) 23:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scottish and British 

message: I have reverted User:Robin48gx's edits to this subsection as I believe they substantially decrease its NPOVness.
Furthermore, the "point" cited from Victor Keegan is also irrelevant - it was written before the auctions had been completed and is necessarily speculative. Keegan says, "[i]t could all end in tears, as a similar auction in the US did last year when winners defaulted on their payments" (my emphasis). But it didn't: the UK 3G auction winners did not renege on their bids.
Soobrickay (talk) 11:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  3G Auctions 

message: I thought it was standard not to include qualifications such as a PhD? In addition (although it is bad form to criticise the absence of content) why not "PC" as well? Ironholds (talk) 01:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Make that "I know it is standard not to include qualifications such as a PhD" according to the MoS. I'm going to remove it. Ironholds (talk) 21:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 

message: Currently at the bottom of the introduction it says... . "He is the eighth Scottish Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the ninth non-English Prime Minister of the United Kingdom". Now i do not know if that is an accurate statement or not but the source provided is http://www.scottishpolitics.org/westminster/primeministers.html which does not appear to show there were 8 (a look at the image selected for Tony blair right at the bottom hardly builds confidence). Brown is clearly one of just a few Scottish prime ministers of the United Kingdom, and thats an important fact to include but does anyone have a good source or know for certain the number? thanks BritishWatcher (talk) 00:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Plus if your read the caption to the Tony Blair picture it states "Tony Blur". It looks like the source is suggesting there have been five Scottish Prime Ministers before Brown, which would make him the sixth Scot and seventh non-Englishman, as David Lloyd George was Welsh. I've marked this statement as dubious for now. YeshuaDavid (talk) 11:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Removed the quote for the moment till we can make sure its accurate. That new link seems more reliable, but i see certain people are still disputed on there too as its hard to just define Scottish leaders, one being born in Canada but of Scottish decent. Blair could equally be classed as Scottish considering he was born and educated there. Would be helpful if we could find an official statement or info from government website on how many there have been. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:   8th Scottish Prime Minister of the United Kingdom 

message: This should be updated to reflect that his views were more conguent with the current Obama adminstration and any reluctance appeared to have been with the Bush adminstration itself.
--213.208.80.235 (talk) 15:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Cross-referencing mentions of Brown in Obama pages would be a sensible first step.--213.208.80.234 (talk) 09:29, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relations with the US