Talk:Charlotte Owen, Baroness Owen of Alderley Edge

Citations

Some of the citations do not appear to work as expected, specifically the ones regarding her parents. Both citations (1 & 4) do not take you to the information in question. Citation 1 take you to a log in/payment page and citation 4 takes you to a search page. When it tried to search on the name Charlotte Owen it returned no results for the dates in question. I do not feel that these are valid citations for this reason. Any thoughts or better citations available? Munta (talk) 22:59, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Munta. I've removed the material as violating our living persons policy which states Exercise extreme caution in using primary sources. Do not use... public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth. Unless this material can be sourced to a reliable secondary source it should not be reinstated. The WP:ONUS lies with those wishing to reinstate it to gather and present the sources. Also note WP:3RRNO. Cheers again! SN54129 11:41, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Although the sources provided violate established WP policy, is context not important here? The subject of the article is currently subject to speculations about her paternity. There are no secondary source available at present that show her father isn't (or is) Boris Johnson, and that her mother isn't (or is) Allegra Mostyn-Owen. Primary sources clearly show her paternity and maternity, and they are not the two aforementioned individuals. Furthermore, the official government document (resignation peerages) doesn't even spell her name correctly! DMEVB (talk) 16:10, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Then why would we use them? Low-quality, contradictory sources in a BLP? See WP:NOTNEWS for why we should wait—for along time if necessary!—for the sources to sort themselves out. In the meantime, we must be guided by policy. Also, per WP:NOTINHERITED, who cares about her ma and pa! SN54129 16:19, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Are you stating that the official government source is low quality, and therefore we should not use that either? This is not a question of WP:NOTINHERITED as notability is already established. DMEVB (talk) 16:24, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

In what was the context that I mentioned WP:NOTINHERITED, please? SN54129 16:28, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

The notable aspect of paternity/maternity is not who her parents actually are, but the fact that they are not (based on primary sources as of 13 June 2023) Boris Johnson and Allegra Mostyn-Owen.

You seem to be stating that the contradictory sources (Resignation Peerages + GRO) are low-quality. However you can only claim they are contradictory if you do in fact admit the GRO. Otherwise they are not contradictory. Which is it? DMEVB (talk) 16:34, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

It's much simpler than that. If you want to mention her parents' names, you have to find a very good reason to do so: WP:BLP1. Secondly, do not use primary sources in a BLP per WP:BLPPRIMARY. These are policies. Incidentally, your attempts at logic must do better! Now, I'm going to disengage from this discussion, because we are going around in circles, and it seems to me that you are not reading the pages you are being directed to. You also seem to have no interest in the sources provided below. However, I will, of course, continue to watch the article, particularly for any addition of poor sourcing. All the best! SN54129 16:49, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm just making a case for allowing primary sources in this instance, admittedly outside of policy. I don't need to be insulted, and I'm afraid it is your logic that is found wanting. DMEVB (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Would Wikipedia be subject to a SuperInjunction issued by the UK courts ? 82.13.19.8 (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

The wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super-injunctions_in_English_law is not clear on what media are covered, but my guess would be that a wikipedia is NOT subject to a super injunction, as it is under US jurisdiction, not English. That said, I've cleared my browser history, used French Google, in a private browsing window, and a VPN placing me outside the UK, and still can't find any reporting of it (yet) Adagio67 (talk) 08:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Independent: I went to university with Charlotte Owen. If she’s a worthy lifetime peer, I’m a baroness
• Who is Charlotte Owen? The youngest life peer after being named in Boris Johnson's honours list
• Boris Johnson’s peerage list reignites calls for House of Lords reform
• Sunak approves Boris Johnson honours list including aides linked to Partygate

Also DMEVB, please stick to using inline citations and use the ref name format to cite sources multiple times. The {{r}} format is largely used for citing page numbers and quotations. I've noticed you've done this on other pages which probably makes you the only user to do this when citing sources Please do not add this format back without a rationale or some sort of consensus. If article size is the concern or spacing, then it can be done so without removing inline citations. At the moment the article isn't having those sorts of issues. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:59, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

WikiCleanerMan referencing at the end of the article is much easier, especially when multiple citations arise from a single reference. Not sure why inline referencing is used at all. After some of your edits (or subsequent users) the page was left with multiple references to the same source. Could you forward me to the referencing guidelines please. Inline referencing seems like a poor choice to me, especially when the article has more than about five references. Articles are incredibly difficult to edit when there are massive blocks of referencing markup inline with the text. I do of course use inline citations, just not inline referencing. Where/what are the guidelines? DMEVB (talk) 18:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Citing sources, it states, "Named references in conjunction with the or templates to specify the page." If you find uses on any article that uses this format, they do exactly that. Citing pages of scholarly sources or book pages/chapters. None of your single uses did just that. And ref name is a shorter and easier way to cite the same sources multiple times. To you, it seems unnecessary, but not to others, not a single other editor is having issues editing with the inline formatting of the references. So please do not restore your method of citation style without consensus. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:13, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Are you using the web editor? Or some other form of editor? Is there some way to hide the inline block referencing. I must be doing it wrong if you find it easy? DMEVB (talk) 19:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Source editing. Control F is useful too. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Illegitimate daughter claim

I deleted the following part-sentence from the intro to the article:

"..., and illegitimate daughter of Boris Johnson."

The footnote cited contains nothing in support of the claim, and the claim is - obviously - potentially defamatory. If anyone wishes to restore that claim, please provide a reliable source that complies with both WP:RS and WP:BLP. Thank you. --Legis (talk - contribs) 11:08, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Career section

This section needs some kind of starting date as a reference point. There are two many vague phrases: 'She worked as an intern for...'; '...for one month. For six months, ...'; 'Following this, for twenty-one months,, etc. For clarity the opening statement should have some reference date. Jfoud (talk) 12:21, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

wanted: reaction of media to her appointment

"..., at age 30, made her the youngest member of the House of Lords and the youngest person ever to receive a life peerage."

https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/boris-johnson-oberhaus-beraterin-charlotte-owen-steuerzahler-1.6086831 writes:

die Ernennung von Charlotte Owen [hat] eine Debatte darüber ausgelöst, wer da eigentlich wie lange auf Steuerzahlerkosten sitzt. Owen ist gerade mal 30. Und damit nun das jüngste Oberhaus-Mitglied, ernannt auf Lebenszeit.

(the appointment of C.O. has triggered a public debate who is sitting (and how long her/she) is sitting in the HoL - for the rest of her life and at the expense of all taypayers).

178.201.81.229 (talk) 08:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)