Jump to content

Talk:Neil Hamilton (politician)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

There is another Neil Hamilton who is arguably more famous than this guy. (Certainly in the UK). How should this chap (the US one) be disambiguated? Neil Hamilton (author) ?

There is also Neil Hamilton (actor) who played Commissioner Gordon on the Batman TV series. Ortolan88
I am not sure Neil Hamilton is bankrupt. Having done a search on the appropriate government web site, neither of the names he uses (Mostyn Neil Hamilton and Neil Hamilton) appears. Does anyone have any evidence that he is bankrupt? A substantial libel win against Max Clifford presumably assisted him greatly, plus myriad television appearance fees for both himself and his wife. User:DavidFarmbrough 17:30 BST 05/05/05
Presumably the bankruptcy was discharged, but that obviously wasn't considered newsworthy, as a Google search doesn't turn it up. According to this article in the Telegraph he was expected to be discharged after three years, which would have been in May 2004. As the Insolvency Register only shows discharged bankruptcies for three months, it wouldn't necessarily show up on there. The article is probably OK as it stands, as it doesn't say that he's still bankrupt, only that he was made bankrupt in 2001. We should probably state that he is no longer bankrupt, though if we could find the date of the discharge that would be better. --rbrwr± 17:53, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering if people were using the expression bankrupt to mean 'insolvent and might become bankrupt' or just to state that his liabilities exceeded his assets. However I have now found a BBC News source that confirms he was indeed 'declared bankrupt in 1991'.User:DavidFarmbrough 11:26 BST 23/08/05
Is the '1991' year stated for his bankruptcy correct - if so, should Hamilton not have been legally forced to resign his seat as an MP on bankruptcy grounds?Cloptonson (talk) 17:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section "Wins BBC libel case" has a puzzling last sentence. I understand that the panorama programme alleged connections to right-wing groups, but what exactly was going on about the Nazi salute and the Sunday Times and the supposed confession? I can't trace any references. Also, what is the "previously cited article"? Presumably the previous citation has now been edited away! Can anyone clear this bit up? Mooncow 21:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's supposed to have confessed, after the BBC decided to back down to the dismay of the programme-makers, that the allegations regarding the Nazi salute were true. I'll see if I can find a reference. Fuzzy Monsters, about the BBC at that time, would be a good place to look. Lovingboth 20:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bit I find a bit odd is the reason given for dropping the libel case against the Guardian. At the time, most people thought that the reason was that they were told they'd lose. In one sense, that's a conflict of interest - losing being against their interest - but... Lovingboth 20:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christine

[edit]

The page for his wife is very small and it might be worth merging the two and renaming it "The Hamiltons" or something. They are well known as a pair in the UK, so this would make sense. Michaelritchie200 09:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite agree.--Couter-revolutionary 22:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Media bias" in the 1997 election

[edit]

The section covering the 1997 election claims that media negativity soured the public perception of him, and implies that Martin Bell's candidacy was part of an orchestrated media campaign. It's all written up in a rather POV manner that tries to make Hamilton look like a victim. surely there was a lot of public interest in whether a corrupt politician (oh yes he was) who refused to stand down could actually survive. The main parties didn't contest the seat because they wanted a popular neutral who could get a crooked politician out of parliament. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Education

[edit]

The article says that Hamilton "studied economics at the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth" and "Hamilton went on to study law at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, where he attained a post-graduate law degree". According to the alumni search facility of the Aberystwyth University website, Hamilton's degree was a BScEcon in Economics and Politics, awarded in 1970, followed by MScEcon in Politics awarded in 1975. This accords with my own memory, having been in the Aberystwyth Politics Dept 1969-1972 and having had the misfortune to know him. (The search facility is only available to registered alumni.) I will amend the article acordingly. However, the sources for "studied economics" would appear to be the same as the claim of post-grad law at Cambridge, i.e. sources controlled by Hamilton, his wife or their PR people. I am not suggesting that he does not have the qualification, far from it, but I think we need a more reliable source that is independent of the subject. There is also the question of how he "worked as a teacher between 1973 and 1976 at St John's College, Southsea" if he was pursuing a masters degree until 1975. Again, there could be perfectly reasonable explanations (part time distance learning for example) but more reliable sources are needed. Emeraude (talk) 10:58, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Parliamentary wit section

[edit]

None of the examples given of his wit are funny. Should it just be deleted? It is pretty cringeworthy stuff. Comment by 90.194.17.214 (talk) 11:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wittiness is not the same as funniness. Hamilton was known as a parliamentary wit so the section is justified, but it is right that much of his "humour" was cringeworthy. (Fellow students at Aberystwyth will testify to this: his impersonations of Enoch Powell owed more to admiration than satire.) Emeraude (talk) 11:05, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

‘Cringeworthy’ seems to be a subjective opinion, so it can not be reported as such; if there is a record of others saying so, that could be reported. Did he have the misfortune to know you as a student or an instructor? 2A00:23C5:E0A0:8300:519F:C286:B1CC:9CD6 (talk) 08:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

World Cup Single

[edit]

Is there any good reason why his 2006 world cup signle isn't mentioned? http://www.bbc.co.uk/wiltshire/content/articles/2006/05/18/hamiltons_world_cup_song_feature.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.252.4.21 (talk) 14:29, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Profession

[edit]

The infobox gives his profession as barrister. My understanding, and it is alluded to in the article, is that someone who has been declared bankrupt is not allowed to practise as a barrister. One might also consider that some of his legal cases would lead to disbarment. If so, then barrister needs to be deleted from the infobox. Emeraude (talk) 10:55, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Abertillery??

[edit]

Don't know if Emeraude can do any better but I couldn't find any results from any Welsh constituency where he might have stood in 1974. If so, thanks. JRPG (talk) 09:59, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

politicsresources.net is a good source for detailed constituency results and shows:
Abertillery
[W] Labour hold
J Thomas Labour 20,068 70.29%
A Richards Plaid Cymru 3,119 10.93%
N Hamilton Conservative 2,730 9.56%
H Clark Liberal 2,632 9.22%
Electorate: 36,298; Turnout: 78.65%;
Majority: 16,949 (59.37%) (Source: UK General Election results February 1974)
Source added to article. Emeraude (talk) 09:08, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Same source also added for Bradford North (when he stood against Andrew Brons). Emeraude (talk) 09:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Emeraude. I have added to my list of interesting websites & will reuse. FWIW, for hopeless cause seats, I'm trying to provide a comparison with General Election averages -which I know the main parties do. I hope this will reduce the amount of wp:editorialising from new editors. Regards JRPG (talk) 21:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. Emeraude (talk) 18:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eldon League

[edit]

Pardon my ignorance but I've never heard of this except in Connection with Hamilton & Michael Brown (British politician). I can't even find any traces on the internet. Can anyone provide futher info? JRPG (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was a student society founded by Hamilton at Cambridge, according to an article in the Reading Eagle, in 1971 (though this can't be right because Hamilton was at Aberystwyth until 1972 at least). How serious it was is debatable: its slogan was "Forward into the past" and it sought, among other nonsense, the restoration of feudalism. Emeraude (talk) 11:05, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Emeraude. I was 90% certain you would be the one who would reply. Looks to my untrained eye like a cross between the MRLP and the Bullingdon club. Many thanks once again. JRPG (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're more than welcome. I think your assessment is about right, though knowing Hamilton it should not be assumed that the political views of the Eldon League were too far away from his political ideals! Incidentally, there's a short chapter mentioning the Eldon League in The Past is a Foreign Country by David Lowenthal (1985). Google Books has some of it here and you may be able to look inside on Amazon. Emeraude (talk) 14:22, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bournemouth West?

[edit]

It says in the 'Political Career' section that Hamilton unsuccessfully contested Bournemouth West before becoming MP for Tatton but Bournemouth West is a safe seat (it has never been lost by the Conservatives) so he couldn't possible have stood there.Preceding comment made 20:17, 28 July 2015‎ by User 2.102.119.74

You're right of course. I suspect that the text should have said that he unsuccessfully contested the party nomination in Bournemouth West. The sitting MP (John Eden) did not stand in 1983 so there would have been a contest for his replacement (won by John Butterfill) in which Hamilton no doubt took part, before winning the nomination for Tatton. Emeraude (talk) 10:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Neil Hamilton (politician). 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 11:36, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Neil Hamilton (politician). 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 00:30, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Hamilton

[edit]

Does this tweet by Neil Hamilton belong on the page? --1.136.111.12 (talk) 22:40, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Neil Hamilton (politician). 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 15:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Categorisations

[edit]

An IP editor raised the question of WP:CATDEF and reverted my recent removal of some categories. To quote WP:CATDEF, "A central concept used in categorizing articles is that of the defining characteristics of a subject of the article. A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having—such as nationality or notable profession (in the case of people), type of location or region (in the case of places), etc. For example, here: "Caravaggio, an Italian artist of the Baroque movement ...", Italian, artist, and Baroque may all be considered to be defining characteristics of the subject Caravaggio."

When people write of Hamilton, do they write of him as "Aberystwyth alum, Neil Hamilton" or "Neil Hamilton, UKIP politician and alumnus of Aberystwyth University". No, they don't. Ergo, it's not a defining characteristic about him. It is not one that reliable sources refer to. So it should go. They do sometimes write of him as "former Tory MP Neil Hamilton", so I would keep that category. Bondegezou (talk) 17:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting and, I believe mistaken, interpretation of CATDEF. While I wouldn't argue that "other stuff exists", it is the case that just about every biographical article includes details and categorisation of the subject's education. It is not the case that this aspect of Hamilton is "not one that reliable sources refer to" - it is properly referenced in the article with reliable sources. Incidentally, I am not an "IP editor" - I signed my edit quite correctly. Emeraude (talk) 07:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TV

[edit]

His wife appeared on some talk program a few years ago, with a few others, one of whom was a convicted criminal. The ex-con was allowed by the host to address her in an insulting manner. Is there a record of which programme this was? 213.205.240.183 (talk) 08:45, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leadership mess

[edit]

Please see Talk:UK Independence Party#Leadership mess. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:10, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disgraced

[edit]

Emeraude, "disgraced" is non-factual, unencyclopedic language. The correct way to do it is to make factual statements and let the facts speak for themselves. Readers can read about cash-for-questions, his television appearances, his bankruptcy, and make their own minds up. cagliost (talk) 16:47, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. The article clearly sets out a series of disgraceful actions in Hamilton's public life from accepting backhanders to lying in court with much else in between. The lead of an article is to summarise and the simple use of the word "disgraceful" does that admirably. It should not be necessary to read the whole article to find that out. Emeraude (talk) 10:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've strengthened the lede, both around cash-for-questions ("implicated" was too weak), and mentioned his television appearances to communicate some of his crankishness and ridiculousness. cagliost (talk) 14:58, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sloppy work again

[edit]

The reference cited to support his appearing in the film "Rocky Horror Picture Show" doesn't document him appearing in the 1975 film. He appeared in a live stage show that I suppose is based on the film. But the blue clickable text "Rocky Horror Picture Show" takes us to the Wikipedia article on the film, not the Wikipedia article on the live stage show. If there is no Wikipedia article on the live stage show, then there should be no blue link. Whether there is or isn't a Wikipedia article on the live stage show, the text should be corrected to make it clear that it's a reference to the live stage show, not the film. If everyone reading this talk-page post believed that it's worth $2 to be steered away from disinformation, than I would be able to spend my entire life correcting things like this. I am not for sale. But I don't put up a paywall either. I just ask you to decide what is worthwhile in your life, and what is worthwhile to avoid.2600:8804:8C40:401:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 01:49, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

You suppose wrong. The film was based on the live show (which does have a Wikipedia link - The Rocky Horror Show) not vice versa. You should read the original source where you will see that it was Hamilton who got the title wrong, not Wikipedia. And rather than complain here, it's easy enough for you to correct yourself, which took less than a minute and isn't worth $2 of anyone's money. Emeraude (talk) 09:40, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Neil_Hamilton_(politician)&oldid=1243291735"