Talk:Patrick Vallance

Patrick Vallance Wikibiography

Hello, if:

1. You haven't edited before (welcome!) start with the The Wikipedia Adventure
2. You are a Scientist, read the Introduction to Wikipedia for Scientists and Ten simple rules for editing Wikipedia from the Wellcome Trust
3. You are Patrick Vallance, check the Wikipedia:Autobiography policy before editing
4. You know Patrick Vallance check the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest policy before editing
5. You have questions, that can't be answered by the above, leave a comment below

Duncan.Hull (talk) 20:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Needs some neutrality and discussion on talk page

@Whispyhistory: As you correctly say "needs some neutrality and discussion on talk page" [1]. So why have you deleted a sourced info without discussion? Popop (talk) 19:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes...I am working on it. There is significant difference in an edit "to make a point" and an edit "to improve the article as a whole". There is also a difference in editing in response to press releases. Feel free to make improving contributions as you think, but there are also certain protections for living people. Whispyhistory (talk) 19:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I regret I cannot improve the article, actually I came here just to look for informations. Nevertheless the article in the present version [2] looks to me very similar to a vanity page. As you correctly say wikipedia should not be edited in response to press releases. So why should we keep such a POV expression as "took a high profile", and yes, "he appeared... in press briefings". Do you consider this sentence to be not in "response to press releases"? The point is that Vallance's assertions were deprived of scientific evidence, as evident from WHO's declarations, the letter you delete the reference to, as well as many other well-informed sources (I recall an article by The Guardian). This is already clear by now to everyone. Deleting informations is not good for wikipedia, and anyway sooner or later, when all this stuff will end, such inappropriate declarations will be quoted in history books. I will wait, but I believe you have not done a good service to wikipedia deleting that sentence. Popop (talk) 20:20, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Who's Who

@Whispyhistory: (Special:Diff/946443971) In case you didn't know already - according to this short extract, Vallance's Who's Who profile confirms (some of) the information in the "Personal life" section. I can't see the full profile myself and I'm not sure whether you have access either, but it is already used as a reference on this page, so I'll leave this here on the talk page if anyone else does. 72 (talk) 21:43, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you...that is a helpful comment. I usually go to a library to access that, but my library is now closed. Whispyhistory (talk) 04:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

GSK shares

I added a paragraph about this. Have tried to keep it as neutral as possible but may need rewording. WisDom-UK (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• St-George s-Hospital.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

National Technology Adviser

In 2021 new announcements included Patrick Vallance as National Technology adviser, which ought to be mentioned here. But the press release is confusing because it says this is a new role, however Liam Maxwell held a role with the same name and unclear difference until 2018. So I am not sure what to write. Ca3tki (talk) 15:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

References