Jump to content

Talk:Nicola Sturgeon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rightgimel (talk | contribs) at 12:28, 15 February 2023 (Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2023 (2): new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Changing nationality to include her self identity

Recently, I made an edit [1] changing her nationality to accord with her recent statements regarding how she identifies as both Scottish and British. @Goodreg3 rightly reverted it, citing the existing consensus here. I had looked for it and had not found those archived discussions. I've now found them and gone back and read through them. Whenever the issue of adding British her nationality has come up, it has been dismissed with the suggestion that as a nationalist politician she is not likely to self-describe as British. (Eg. here) We now know this is not the case: [2], [3], [4], [5]. It is now clear that she considers herself both British and Scottish. Thus, that the arguments that sustained the previous consensus no longer stand and we should change the article accordingly. Jtrrs0 (talk) 16:29, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agreed when I saw the headline and the single-line quotation. However, looking at the context and what she said at the same time, I'm not convinced. The context, according to The National, was "Asked about how the Yes campaign can win over hearts and minds to the cause...". Sturgeon went on to say "British is an identity that comes from being part of the British Isles. An independent Scotland will still be part of the British Isles." Really, then, she was saying that she is and always will be British because Scotland is part of a group of islands known as the British Isles and that the adjective associated with those islands collectively is 'British'. That's very different from what I thought when I saw the headline. It's similar to the Brexit argument: 'we'll still be European because the UK will still be in geographic Europe; we just won't be in the EU'. We could put the context and fuller description of what she said in the body of the article, but not in the infobox or lead, where it could easily be misinterpreted in the way that I misinterpreted it. EddieHugh (talk) 17:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing sentence

The early life section includes the sentence "In her teens, she was “austere” and her style was gothic, which led to many of her teenager pictures questioning others whether she was a boy or girl." Is this meant to mean "many people who saw pictures of her as a teenager questioned whether she was a girl or boy"? In any case, it doesn't seem hugely relevant and feels possibly a bit sexist. Llewee (talk) 10:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be based on Sturgeon's own words. The sentence would benefit from making that clear and just being clearer in general. PelicanPrize (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Monkey1987king: Request to split articles

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


User:Monkey1987king has suggested that this page should be split into articles titled Early life and career of Nicola Sturgeon, Political positions of Nicola Sturgeon and Timeline of Nicola Sturgeon's premiership. Adding that the article may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. Please consider splitting content into sub-articles, condensing it, or adding subheadings. Please discuss this issue on the article's talk page. (December 2022)

Oppose: There are already articles on her premiership and there is no need to have seperate articles on her early life and career, this is what this page is for. Political positions is one I can understand however it could still be kept on this page. ~ KeyKing666 (talk) 22:26, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Feel it to be unnecessary to have various separate articles on the one individual. A separate article on her premiership is understandable and normal, however, I feel the others proposed would not be beneficial. Goodreg3 (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OpposeHalf-kratos21 (talk) 03:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose She is a fairly minor political figure globally, only really known inside the UK. She doesn't really warrant four articles. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 17:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Tim O'Doherty: Whilst I support your motion to oppose the proposed article split, I don't think it is fair to refer to Sturgeon as a "fairly minor political figure", given the fact she has visited countries such as the US and met with senior politicians, and attended international summits such as both COP26 and COP27, the Artic Circle and spoken at the United Nations to name but a few. Goodreg3 (talk) 00:39, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You've cut out the operative word: "globally". Ask 100 non-UK citizens who she is and I doubt many people will know. She isn't even the second most powerful person in Scottish politics. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 15:21, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How important we personally feel a person should be globally is irrelevant to the discussion. WP:LENGTH and WP:SUMMARY are the only considerations we need to make with regards to discussions over splitting an article. "Importance" just means "I care about them" and "Global Importance" just means "I care about them A WHOLE BUNCH". That's of little relevance to the discussion at hand; what is relevant is does the relevant article text meet the standards of the WP:MOS, and if not, how should we remedy that. --Jayron32 18:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article is currently swamped primarily by material that either is already covered by Premiership of Nicola Sturgeon or should be covered there. If there is any excessive text here, that is remedied by removing duplicate material from this article. Removing the smaller sections into their own articles actually makes the situation worse and not better, as it would result in some WP:UNDUE problems. The length issue is a problem, but the OP's proposed solution is 180 degrees in the wrong direction to solve it. --Jayron32 17:28, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: It would be unnecessary to have separate pages like early life which could be put on this page. WideMan27 (talk) 10:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Family members

She has two sisters, (Gillian - NHS worker, already mentioned) and Alison (studied at Edinburgh Napier University) 91.110.45.239 (talk) 19:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split the page

I suggest that splitting the page is not necessary. Political career and early life, which are already included, are already enough. 86.189.252.45 (talk) 10:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2023

Grammar: please change "who's" to "whose" in "She has described herself as being an “austere” teen who's style tended towards goth" (in second paragraph of "Early years and family", in section "Early life") 92.16.238.94 (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed, thanks. — Czello 11:53, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2023 (2)

Add a hyperlink to the Wikipedia page for Alex Salmond in the "Preceeded by" section. Rightgimel (talk) 12:28, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]