Talk:Hugh Dallas

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hugh Dallas article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

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.

Biography: Sports and Games

	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
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Football: Scotland Low‑importance

	Association football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football 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.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Scottish football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Referees High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the Referees WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Referees. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.RefereesWikipedia:WikiProject RefereesTemplate:WikiProject RefereesReferees articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Talk:Hugh Dallas/Archive 1

Article Tags

I do not think that the article requires a complete rewrite now, nor do i think the tone is innapropriate. An editor may still disagree with the neutrality of the article and i still think some of the refs may need to be double checked. So in effect what i am asking is it okay to remove the rewrite and tone tags from the top of the article? Monkeymanman (talk) 12:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"resignation"

Can we point out his "resignation" occured while disciplinary proceedings were ongoing? Obviously the whole tone of the article should be revisited now Hugh is objectively, a confirmed bigot. Particularly the game in 1999 when his sectarian bias caused a near riot. 94.197.90.77 (talk) 21:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If he is found guilty by any disciplinary panel that can be added after they have publicly announced their findings, their is no point wildly speculating about it and wether he is a bigot or not, it would not merit any changes to his refereeing career Adam4267 (talk) 21:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Wildly speculating" about the fact he was under disciplinary proceedings? Why? The sources are there. 92.41.118.131 (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

why does this page not cite the fact that he was sacked?

The BBC says that he was.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9235284.stm

I shall quote from the article.

"the sacking of Hugh Dallas by the Scottish Football Association"

May I ask why this has been omitted from the page?

Agree This page is ridiculously biased. Surely the story of Hugh shows you can only get away with that for so long? 92.41.118.131 (talk) 22:13, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a 'reference' which is more senior than the BBC? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.147.4.188 (talk) 23:35, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Their are also references stating he has resigned it is unclear at the moment what has actually happened. As for you'r allegations this page is bias if you would care to show examples that you beleive are bias.Adam4267 (talk) 22:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have given a link, from the BBC, which states that Mr Dallas was sacked. This information has been excluded from inclusion for no good reason, therefore it would be reasonable to assume that there must be some other reason for the exclusion, and bias would certainly be one of those reasons which would be uppermost in the mind, for the reason previously outlined. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.147.4.188 (talk) 23:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sky Sports and the curret ref from ESPN both say resigned and I would consider both those on par with the BBC although you may be using a different scale from me.

As for what appears to be you accusing me of bias I have not made any significant conributions to this page all I have done is remove vandalism and insert a ref

I still beleive we should wait until further information is released and that the current wording which states neither 'sacked' or 'resigned', is perfectly fine Adam4267 (talk) 23:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you could point out where I accused you of being biased in this matter, as you allege I did, I'd be much obliged, otherwise I'll simply have to assume that this is an unfounded and groundless attack on myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.147.4.188 (talk) 00:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'This information has been excluded from inclusion for no good reason, therefore it would be reasonable to assume that there must be some other reason for the exclusion, and bias would certainly be one of those reasons which would be uppermost in the mind' Adam4267 (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The third wording to show up is appeal. Hugh Dallas is supposed to have appealed against his dismissal. The newspiece is of The Telegraph. I see it as such, that you do not resign, and then appeal against it. The Telegraph seems to make a double confirmation of the version that he was sacked.

Whenever Norway would play, he very much behaved like the 12th oponement. Despite all that he got away with, child abuse (as a subject) was the reason to get sacked. --83.108.28.118 (talk) 23:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Hugh Dallas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:45, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Hugh Dallas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:12, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Hugh Dallas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:55, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]