Talk:Gordon Hamilton Fairley

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

University of Oxford

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Australia Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Gordon Hamilton Fairley is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Northern Ireland

	Northern Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Northern IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Northern IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Northern IrelandNorthern Ireland-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Troubles, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
Neutrality: All editors on Troubles-related articles are directed to get the advice of neutral parties via means such as outside opinions.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

External link[edit]

External link changed to one that does not need login and password: I hope it's equally relevant. JohnG62 (talk) 13:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Date[edit]

Was the bombing on the 22 or 23 October 1975? Sources differ and wikipedia articles contradict each other. Drutt (talk) 21:40, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bomb 'intended for...'[edit]

You say 'The bomb was intended for Sir Hugh Fraser, his wife Lady Antonia Fraser and their guest Caroline Kennedy'. It is a little unlikely that the IRA would intend to blow up America's most popular and high-profile Catholic. I believe the IRA were horrified when they later heard that Caroline Kennedy was staying with the Frasers, and how near they had come to an own-goal that would have cut off most of their American funding overnight. 81.129.150.35 (talk) 13:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree but cannot locate an authoritative source that states the PIRA was unaware of Ms Kennedy's presence. In addition, and according to recent reports, Ms Kennedy was staying at the Fraser's, not living nearby as stated in the wiki article. Crusher1 (talk) 12:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the evidence to support the statement "which he accidentally triggered as he discovered the weapon under a neighbours car."? Can we not take reference to his death out of the introduction as it's more than adequately covered in the article. --Flexdream (talk) 00:51, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Balcombe Street Gang[edit]

Source says "The IRA's Balcombe Street gang, who are being freed from jail, have been serving life sentences after carrying out a two-year bombing and murder campaign in Britain." .. "Their booby-trap devices killed Captain Roger Goad, an explosives expert, and cancer expert Professor Gordon Hamilton-Fairley, who was mistakenly killed by a car bomb." ,, "At their Old Bailey trial, the gang members faced 25 charges, including seven murders.They were also accused of conspiring to cause explosions throughout 1975, and falsely imprisoning the couple during the siege.They were found guilty, and in February 1977, O'Connell, now 47, Butler, 49, and Duggan, 46, were sentenced to 12 life sentences." That's pretty clear. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/1999/apr/10/johnmullin says " Among those they murdered was father-of-four Gordon Hamilton-Fairley, a professor and cancer expert, who worked at St Bartholomew's hospital."--Flexdream (talk) 21:56, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"That's pretty clear". No it is not. My reason was "Source makes absolutely no claim that the Balcombe Street Gang were convicted of his specific murder". The Balcombe Street Gang were responsible for more deaths than they were actually convicted of, so you will need a source that specifically says they were convicted of murdering Gordon Hamilton-Fairley, which the Guardian source does not to either. "Among those they murdered" does not necessarily equal "Among those they were convicted of murdering". O Fenian (talk) 11:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are clear and unambiguous and I'm happy for this to get a third opinion or arbitration or whatever happens in such circumstances in Wikipedia. "Among those they murdered" on the Guardian website, subject to strict UK libel laws, is categoric.--Flexdream (talk) 16:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All you need to do is provide a source that supports your claim, neither does at present. If everything written in British newspapers is true due to libel laws, then why do so many British newspapers get sued for libel? The addition is conjecture based on the sources, they does not say they were convicted of the murder of Gordon Hamilton-Fairley. O Fenian (talk) 22:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Take your pick from this search - Lost Lives perhaps - Google is your friend Kernel Saunters (talk) 11:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And here's another [1] --Slp1 (talk) 18:07, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Slp1 is correct: "A jury convicted the [Balcombe Street] four .. yesterday [9 February 1977] of murdering Ross McWhirter, ... Prof Gordon Hamilton-Fairley and ... Capt. Roger Goad as well as three other persons." (Excerpted from an American newspaper, The Pittsburgh Press, Feb 10, 1977) [2].

Fraser and the SAS[edit]

For the benefit of editors who might wonder at my recent revert, the full quote from Moysey (full details in the article) on p. 108 is:

The intended target, Sir Hugh Fraser, was a staunch proponent of the death penalty for crimes involving terrorism, and was an outspoken member of the Tory party on the topic of Northern Ireland. He had also been a wartime member of the Special Air Service Regiment. As such, he was regarded as a legitimate target by GHQ...

So it is a bit more complicated than saying he was targeted merely for being a Tory MP. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 15:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"wartime" refers to World War II, not the Troubles. The fact that he was a self-identified "Conservative Unionist" politician is inextricably linked to the assassination attempt. If he had been a left-wing, anti-partitionist from the same era, such as Tony Benn, for instance, or had not been a politician at all, it is almost inconceivable and highly unlikely, respectively, that he would ever have been targeted, regardless of World War II affiliations going back some three decades. It doesn't explain how "Conservative, M.P." re Fraser in the lede is somehow confusing or inaccurate. It also fails to explain why if Fraser's WWII SAS service somehow contributed to the assassination attempt on his life three decades later, that hypothesis or theory is not mentioned at all in the Fraser article, which I just checked. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Gordon Hamilton-Fairley. Talk about Sir Hugh Fraser should be taken to the talk page for that article, where your more likely to get useful contributions from others. You can put a redirect here if you like. --Flexdream (talk) 17:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I made the changes to this article, as they were relevant, and I commented here to explain why I made the changes. It would not make sense to leave this comment at the other article.

By the way, Rms, indenting all the way across the page like that is really obnoxious. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 02:03, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately for RMS, the beliefs that Fraser expressed weren't unique to the Tories, the National Front generally made comments of a similar nature. If RMS has any sources specifically stating that he was targets simply for being a member of the Conservative Party, I suggest they are produced. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 12:37, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RepublicanJacobite - I wasn't referring to your comment explaining the change, but that it looked like a discussion was beginning here which I think belongs in the Sir Hugh Fraser article. Anyone interested can read it there. --Flexdream (talk) 18:50, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Funeral[edit]

I question the uncited statement that 10,000 people attended his funeral (sic) - are you sure it was not a memorial service? I recall reading (as a teenager at time of his death) in the deaths or funeral service notices of The Times, that at the time of publication he had been "privately cremated in London" (crematorium unnamed) and that a memorial service at a named church was to be held. I doubt any crematorium in London could hold that large a congregation and it would hardly have been a private service in such circumstances.Cloptonson (talk) 09:52, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a ^{[citation needed]} tag there dated October 2011 so you can go ahead and remove that sentence.--Flexdream (talk) 21:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will delete the sentence which I reproduce below. I do not want users with better access than I have now to material eg news, to be discouraged from establishing the facts. Unfortunately I have no access to Times files since the microfilmed collection in my local reference library got moved into storage when its building was closed down a few years ago.

More than 10,000 people attended his funeral, and Elizabeth II sent a representative to pay her respects.

Cloptonson (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]