Talk:Michael Wharton

Style

"[The] obituary pursued the same thread to an even more precipitous minefield". A thoroughly mixed metaphor. Leibniz 08:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

No proof

The "Guardian's" claim that Wharton was a Nazi is not substatiated by any quotations.

I have removed this quote. As you say, it gives no quotes or support. Such a grave allegation should be supported with actual evidence.120.17.31.93 (talk) 01:28, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

The quotation from the Guardian did not say that he was a Nazi, as claimed in the first paragraph above. It was more nuanced than that. As a properly cited quote from a major newspaper, I don't think it should have been removed. I was a regular reader of Wharton's column. Though I greatly enjoyed his writing, his apparent sympathy for Nazi Germany made me very uncomfortable. It seemed at times as though his hatred of Communism was so strong, that almost anything that was anti-Communist would meet with his approval. JH (talk page) 09:06, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Lack of balance

This article is somewhat unbalanced by undue coverage of attacks on him by those who were his political enemies, and attempts to smear him by association with doubtful friends. He was a very well-loved eccentric, and his attacks on busy-bodies and trendies were always liable to be taken amiss by busy-bodies and trendies. I have lots of doubts that a few dubious claims by BNP people (in their own interests) deserve the huge proportion of the article that they occupy. Even the Guardian obituary is more balanced. Not sure how to rebalance it, tho. Roger Pearse 16:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Restoring Objectivity

A step forward would be to remove the two defamatory paragraphs (Allegations of racism, Alleged support for BNP) until a more reasoned text can be arrived at. With these in place the article commits the elementary sin of attributing attitudes expressed in his satirical columns to Wharton personally. Worse he is damned by association, with no reliable evidence, with the lunatic fringe of his readers. A fair assessment of Wharton's work would consider the extent to which he shared the controversial opinions of his characters and more volatile readers, not blindly assume they are one and the same. That said, I can't help feeling that Wharton would be grimly amused by the Reductio ad Hitlerum paragraphs in the current draft. Ahumphr (talk) 09:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Good piece on Wharton

There'a a good article about him in today's Daily Telegraph by his daughter, Jane. It doesn't seem to be on their website yet, but I imagine that it will be before long. JH (talk page) 09:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

There's a good piece in today's Telegraph by Harry Mount, marking the fact that his 100th birthday would have been yesterday: "Michael Wharton: The man who foresaw the way of the world". JH (talk page) 09:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Wharton. 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/20131126142048/http://my.telegraph.co.uk/thefulminator/thefulminator/26/homage-to-the-funniest-newspaper-columnist-of-all-time/ to http://my.telegraph.co.uk/thefulminator/thefulminator/26/homage-to-the-funniest-newspaper-columnist-of-all-time/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fopinion%2F2002%2F03%2F15%2Fdo1504.xml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:13, 30 November 2017 (UTC)