Talk:Calvin Robinson

Billy Bragg

It is factually correct that, In July 2021, Robinson appeared in an interview on Channel 4's 4 News with the singer and left-wing political activist Billy Bragg.n the interview, Bragg challenged Robinson's claims that he was a supporter of the England team's unifying effect on the country by asking his opinion on the England team 'taking the knee' before matches. At odds with his position of harmony and unification, Robinson argued that taking the knee was "a disgusting thing to do" and that the team was not "taking a stance against racism" and was, instead, promoting "Black Lives Matter, a neo-Marxist, anti-British, anti-family organisation". This despite the public position expressed by the England team and its manager on why they had adopted the gesture to make a stand against racism. Robinson went on to accuse the England manager, Gareth Southgate of "jumping on a bandwagon" and that he needed to "learn the lesson that fans were not interested in politics on the field". The response by Bragg, a fit of laughter in the face of Robinson's statement, caused both to trend on Twitter.

Please do not remove this section of this article citing 'opinion'. This is not an opinion. It happened, as is made clear in the references. Ed Further (talk) 06:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Racial abuse allegations

Hi, @Dialmayo and IP user (82.20.254.54). As mentioned in my edit summary I believe that the addition of the words 'but he has provided no evidence for it' may be tendentious and the source cited does provide evidence for his claim in the form of tweets directed at him. As the article reports them they seem to have been seen by the author of the article and can thus be seen as independent evidence of abuse. I am happy to discuss this if you think the words should stay. Jtrrs0 (talk) 15:59, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, you can restore the version before the IP edit if you'd like, I just corrected the grammar of the edit. The phrasing did seem pretty biased. Dialmayo (talk) (Contribs) Please ping me when replying. 16:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

@Dialmayo.  Thanks for the reply. No worries. Jtrrs0 (talk) 16:07, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

This has been ongoing for some days from the same POV-pusher. Per WP:DENY, I will not elucidate further by evaluating the IP's basis, but it has happened before that genuine editors have misunderstood some of the policy statement.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 21:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

@Rocknrollmancer Thanks for the input. I had noticed the IP had tried to do the same thing before but not its extent. Thanks for pointing it out. Jtrrs0 (talk) 22:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

For the record, and hopeful of discussing this here rather than see an editor blocked, my view is that the article as worded currently, ie, "Robinson has claimed that his commentary has made him the target of racial abuse" is supported by the source cited [1] because Wikipedia's voice merely reports that he has made these claims (which the Nottingham Post article details) and passes no judgement on their veracity or reasonableness. To then say that there is no evidence of being true is not only probably contrary to the source we have (because the Nottingham Post arguably is an independent source for his claims as I mentioned above) but is a violation of the tone required for biographies of living persons because it uses loaded language. Jtrrs0 (talk) 11:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

This article is now at a level for WP:SILVERLOCK; I was about to suggest this a few days ago but have had a few days off-Wiki and the same is continuing, now reported at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 21:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hopefully now that the IP is blocked it won't be necessary to protect it with WP:SILVERLOCK but it is becoming rather annoying. I only found the IP had returned by chance last time... Jtrrs0 (talk) 11:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Someone has just made three very similar non-constructive edits with a different IP. Maltice (talk) 17:17, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Maltice, Jtrrs0, I thought it was the wrong admin decision to allow newbies and IPs to continue. The recent different IPs may be VPN. The same thing's been going on at TommyInnit and whenever the lock is lifted they launch-in, as before.

There's a lot wrong with this (Calvin Robinson) lede with effectively-unsourced birth details which are plain wrong when compared to the free bmd databases - the consequence of well-intentioned contributors, AGF would have us assume. I've started to trawl through the history and will add the result to the Talk page.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 15:47, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Robinson's media career to date

This section needs development. Would argue it is distinct from his political activities, yet integral to his fame/notability. Atomix330 (talk) 02:39, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Fascist

Robinson is described as a fascist in the introduction paragraph. That seems to be an unsupported claim as there is no citation. 50.41.4.67 (talk) 12:52, 19 March 2023 (UTC) 92.41.111.253 (talk) 20:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

cleric?

Currently my understanding is that Mr Harris (although at theological college) is not sufficiently qualified to call himself a cleric/priest. Though in the article he is referred to as Father. This is all very confusing and it seems to require someone with requisite knowledge to fix. I find his use of religious garb rather offensive if he is really just "playing" vicar which is a position he appears to enjoy, and a factor that weighed on the decision to deny him curacy.92.41.111.253 (talk) 20:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

He is not "playing" the cleric, regardless of what you think about his views. He is a Deacon which is not a vicar, of course, but father deacon is a perfectly valid form of address amongst anglo-catholics. The FCE is not the Church of England but as the page says, it is affiliated with GAFCON and part of the global Anglican communion. Again, what you think about that will often depend on where you sit on the points of debate, but that goes rather beyond this article. In any case, there is no place for our sense of offence when editing the article. We just go with where the sources take us. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

No one has to be "sufficiently qualified to call himself a cleric/priest". Anyone can! [2]. DeCausa (talk) 08:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Ordination

https://twitter.com/CharlieSansom/status/1720916069307515318?t=qCd5zpu1c5GM_7S3lHHeXQ&s=19 AJRT1 (talk) 15:37, 5 November 2023 (UTC)