User talk:92.17.177.35

Left or right-wing descriptors in articles

Hi, thanks for your contributions and for raising this point. Firstly, even an examination of the Times and particular Telegraph articles notes they're classified as "center-right" and they're certainly moved towards the center over the years, so your desired material would be inaccurate and a couple of decades out of date at the very least, seeing as you're addiing the term "right-wing". Meanwhile the Wikipedia article for the think tank in question classes it as "left-wing", so that content is accurate. More importantly, we need to look as to whether sources discuss the politics of these organisations in the context of these two individuals, not to mention how well know the organisations are. Reliable sources covering Lewis Goodall explicitly state the politics of the think tank he worked for as "left-wing", and thus the case for such a statement in the article is particularly strong. Meanwhile sources concerning Barnett don't appear to state the politics of those publications. Furthermore, most people are aware of the political leanings of newspapers which both sell in very large quantities, whereas awareness of almost every think tank would be much, much less and thus worthy of describing. Finally, we can assess the relevance of using such terms by examining the subject and their politics overall. Barnett's article is quite detailed yet and by far the most obvious political classification for her would be "feminist" and her political party is the Women's Equality Party (which is associate with the left). Lewis Goodall is very well known and vocal in his support of the Labour Party, with sources showing this and he was even a Labour Party activist at some point. the think tank in question is also heavily Labour linked and thus again such politics clearly worthy of coverage in the article in some way. Anyway I hope this explains the issue for you clearly.--Shakehandsman (talk) 06:30, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

I just realised that Barnett wasn't categorised as being associated with WEP, so I've fixed that issue, thus now making both articles equal in terms of their coverage of notable politics - I guess you were at least slightly right in that there wasn't complete parity. Thanks for raising the issue.--Shakehandsman (talk) 06:47, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

---