Talk:Boris Johnson

{{edit semi-protected|Boris Johnson|answered=yes}}

get rid of mp by his name and hon friba — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vauxhallinsig (talk • contribs)

:No, because he is still an MP. See the two discussions of this above. Grachester (talk)

Paragraph 2 says Boris Johnson was added to Michael Howard's shadow cabinet in 2001, but Michael Howard was not leader of the opposition at the time. Later in the article, it says Boris Johnson was added to the shadow cabinet in 2004 JDawg37 (talk) 15:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

In the last few days before her death, the late Queen is now reported to have said of Boris Johnson, who had been replaced by Liz Truss as Prime Minister: "{{tq|Well at least I won't have that idiot organising my funeral now.}}" This is reported in The Times by Tim Shipman: [https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/boris-johnson-queen-tim-shipman-nch7ntg5f]. Does protocol dictate that this should not be included in this article, even though the Queen is now deceased? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

:Is it reported as an established fact in the voice of The Times, or as hearsay? -- DeFacto (talk). 11:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

::I'm pretty sure Shipman wasn't in the room at the time. So I suspect you would describe it as "hearsay". Martinevans123 (talk) 12:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

:The claim comes from Shipman's latest book, Out, and is given on page 625. The reference is this{{sfn|Shipman|2024|p=625}} if anybody wishes to add it. The information is practically identical to the Times source, as can be expected for a book-pushing piece. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 00:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

:{{refbegin}}

:* {{Cite book |last=Shipman |first=Tim |title=Out: How Brexit Got Done and the Tories Were Undone |publisher=William Collins |year=2024 |isbn=978-0-00-830894-0 |author-link=Tim Shipman}}

:{{refend}} Tim O'Doherty (talk) 00:32, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

::Also appears in: [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2024/11/10/late-queen-joked-funeral-wont-organised-idiot-boris-johnson/ The Daily Telegraph], [https://parliamentnews.co.uk/after-boris-resign-elizabeth-ii-made-a-brutal-joke-at-least-my-funeral-wont-be-organised-by-that-idiot parliamentnews.co.uk], [https://www.tatler.com/article/queen-elizabeth-joke-boris-johnson-idiot The Tatler], [https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1974286/queen-elizabeth-brutal-comment-boris-johnson Daily Exress], [https://www.skynews.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity-life/id-like-to-know-who-was-the-source-of-that-former-british-pm-boris-johnson-debunks-malicious-queen-elizabeth-ii-rumour/news-story/29b764e7a56c09cdfb3982485dd7b1a4 SkyNews Australia], etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

Under the subheading of "Public Image" there is a part which reads "and has been compared to former US president Donald Trump."

I propose changing this to "and has been compared to Donald Trump, the 45th and 47th President of the US.

This will allow it to read correctly currently and in the future.

Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov/ Zaaaaaac (talk) 13:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

:Has he been compared to Trump in the past six days? That might need a new source to support it, as the current references are dated 2016 and 2021. Otherwise, adding the presidency numbers for Trump seems like unnecessary detail. But I agree the word "former" could go. In fact is might be better to says "was compared", as I think it's unlikely to ever happen again. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:45, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

::Not that I have seen. Would dropping the part about Trumps presidency altogether be appropriate? As I'm guessing most people know who he is. I agree it is unnecessary. "was compared" sounds like a one time thing, "has been" sounds like a multiple (2016 & 2021). Interested in your thoughts as I'm new to Wikipedia editing.

::"and has been compared to Donald Trump"

::or if the President distinction is necessary, "two time US president Donald Trump" - that reads to me as correct currently and in the future - alleviating the need to edit it yet again for this purpose.

::While unlikely to happen I don't see it as improbable, think political articles involving both the UK and US maybe mentioning an event which is connected to the two of them. Zaaaaaac (talk) 14:19, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

:::I would strongly advise against editing to include your own personal prediction that Johnson will be compared to Trump in this presidency. If the four existing sources support a number of different instances then "has been compared a number of times" might be better. Perhaps other editors have some ideas. But I'll remove the word "former" for now. Just using Donald Trump might be enough. Thanks for asking here. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:34, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

::::I've just noticed that there is a bit of duplication, in the comparison to Trump, across the article. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:36, 26 January 2025 (UTC)