Talk:Stephen Pollard

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Stephen Pollard. 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/20100808044933/http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/content.asp?pageid=35 to http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/content.asp?pageid=35
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) 16:16, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Former revisions included cited articles written by Stephen Pollard. No reason was given for the career section being removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piers39293 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Basic policy. Per WP:PSTS articles should be based on secondary sources. If there's no indication from secondary coverage that inclusion of material is WP:DUE doing so gives rise to WP:NPOV issues. We must be extra careful because this is a WP:BLP. Alexbrn (talk) 03:22, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why has this article been stripped of career information? 

message: I removed this addition, but it was reverted. The content seems trivial and non-notable, and the source is not good enough for a BLP, which requires a higher standard of sources as per WP:BLPSOURCES. Bellowhead678 (talk) 21:14, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: This is based on tweets? Seems completely undue. Alexbrn (talk) 05:35, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using Muslim News as a source for a BLP 

message: Alexbrn Why is: In 2012, he praised Boris Johnson as "a political heavyweight with mass appeal".
He has been described as an anti-Muslim hatemonger".
undue/ misrepresented sources? Jontel (talk) 14:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah - generally subheads cannot be reliably attributed to the author of a piece (they are often added by editorial staff). And the weaselly "has been described as" is not good. Where is the weight for these things? Secondary sources? Adding contentious labels from blog posts to WP:BLPs is a big no-no. Alexbrn (talk) 14:51, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Because he is discussing somebody else's views, not his own. Please see your Talk page for concerns about this. Alexbrn (talk) 14:06, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletions 

message: Should we add something about all the complaints upheld by IPSO against the JC whilst he's been editor? 80.47.148.59 (talk) 02:26, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPSO 

message: 1. Eliot Weinberger ("contemporary American writer, essayist, editor, and translator"), in an article on his London Review of Books blog about Pollard's review in the New York Times Book Review, titled "The Appeasers", of Bruce Bawer's "Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom": "Unquestionable Political Correctness", 28 July 2009 - "Edited by Sam Tanenhaus (biographer of Whittaker Chambers and, in progress, William F. Buckley), the NYTBR is predictably softcore right-of-centre. So it was something of a surprise that  they assigned noted anti-Muslim hatemonger Stephen Pollard to review the latest book – Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom – by noted  anti-Muslim hatemonger Bruce Bawer. (In 2006, Bawer published While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from  Within, which may help explain why Western Civilisation now lies in ruins.)"       ←   ZScarpia   16:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pollard detractors.