Talk:Eddy Shah
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Listing
editListing as arts & entertainment due to his newspaper ownership. Secretlondon 04:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Repeated vandalism
editOn at least two occasions an anonymous user has added a comment to the article stating that "he is very happy and likes to ride his harley davidson around long strips of roads." This has been removed on each occasion because it is not cited as legitimate biographical detail and is certainly not formatted appropriately for an encyclopaedia. Mrstonky 06:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Rape prosecution
editI've just deleted the whole section even though it's well sourced. Shah has been acquited. No doubt the subject will reappear, but it needs to be handled carefully (if at all) in the light of the acquital. --Simon Speed (talk) 14:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Not disputing this needs to be handled carefully, but that does not justify wholesale deletion. PatGallacher (talk) 15:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm no fan of this guy (a union busting s***t) but I'm concerned that he's presented as anything but innocent. The charge and trial were public facts about Shah when they were happening and his status had then shifted to being an accused person. In the current article, the verdict is presented as a mere fact about the trial, rather than a negation of the whole process. The paragraph reads like a piece of newspaper innuendo. --Simon Speed (talk) 22:12, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- I've added more post trial detail from a wp:Suggested sources which I believe meets all requirements. See also wp:NOTCENSORED. His views on children are notable. This section is nothing whatever to do with personal life and should be in its own section. JRPG (talk) 09:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Account of the Warrington strike - non-neutral pov
editThe account of the Warrington strike claims that Shah "As the owner of the Warrington Messenger ... sacked six workers in a declared anti-union move." This is clearly partial and pov. As the sources make clear, Shah was not anti-union until the NGA ordered him to himself sack six workers who refused to join the union. Comments are invited. Zythophile (talk) 14:17, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Ludicoursly POV section, I'm going to try to fix it up a bit. 81.140.215.136 (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2021 (UTC)