| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jacob Rees-Mogg article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 6 months  |
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | Jacob Rees-Mogg was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 29, 2019). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | 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.This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Legitimacy of Suzanne Moore's view on Sir Jacob
editIn the Public Image category of the article, only view on Sir Jacob is that of Suzanne Moore's, whose bias towards man like Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg should be clear, given that she has identified as a republican (anti-monarchist) and written for newspapers like "Marxism Today", "the Guardian" and "the New Statesman" all of which are lefists and/or progressive and liberal. She has also written many articles and statesments, for example: a the Guardian Article about "Men on the left are sexist. Labour needs to do more to fix it" and been described as "One of the most precious left-wing voices in the British press" That is why i propose that either A) Moore's overview of Sir Jacob be removed B) Another overview of Sir Jacob be added from a more right-wing or independent commentator. Or C) Moore's views as a Socialist be mentioned, for example changing In 2017 the commentator Suzanne Moore compared Rees-Mogg... to In 2017, left-wing commentator Suzanne Moore compared Rees-Mogg...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/25/prince-andrew-bad-apple-abolish-monarchy-republic https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/14/men-on-left-sexist-labour-womens-rights https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2020/11/first-thoughts-how-suzanne-moore-split-guardian 185.230.179.3 (talk) 08:07, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- Just to note, her Wikipedia article is at Suzanne Moore. It describes here as a republican, but not as a socialist. But then WP is not WP:RS. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that Moore stuff needs to be there at all. What is it really adding? She makes a somewhat dubious comparison to three of the other bet noires of the left, Trump, Johnson and Farage, and then calls him bigot and says his views verge on the fascistic. Is this really helpful to the reader? Compare to a parallel character on the left, Jeremy Corbyn. There is no 'Public Image' section there, the closest thing is a 'Media Coverage' section. This is entirely composed of references to how the media is hostile to him, without citing any quotes from that media. Meanwhile on the Jacob-Rees Mogg article, the largest part of the comparable section is... quotes of the media actually being hostile to him. LastDodo (talk) 16:00, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Jacob rees-mogg job
editJacob Rees-Mogg is now a broadcaster, rather than a politician, as incorrectly described. He lost his Parliamentary seat in 2023. Perhaps you will correct the record. ~2025-32677-86 (talk) 20:22, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- @~2025-32677-86
- Agreed.
- Given his well known insistence on extreme formalism and precise definitions, it seems only consistent to apply the term politician strictly. As he no longer holds elected office, describing him as a politician is misleading and imprecise.
- I suggest using political pundit. Jame5 07961 (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2026 (UTC)
Good article
editAnyone think this should be nominated as a good article? LibStar (talk) 03:19, 7 May 2026 (UTC)