Login
Login

Talk:The longest suicide note in history

{{Talk header}}

{{Old AfD multi| date = 4 March 2010 (UTC) | result = keep | page = The longest suicide note in history }}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1=

{{WikiProject Elections and Referendums}}

{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=low}}

{{WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom|importance=}}

}}

{{transwikied to Wiktionary}} --CopyToWiktionaryBot 11:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Untitled

This could be a good article about the 700-page policy document and the 39-page manifesto, but [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_longest_suicide_note_in_history&oldid=349045382 my suggested changes] were reverted.

I am not going to bother to change it back, but the revert has:

  • reinstated a broken link to the Keele copy of the manifesto
  • removed a link to the interesting discussion in the Havighurst book
  • removed a link to a relevant recent article in the Daily Telegraph

The 700 page/39 page confusion also needs to be corrected. -- Jttw (talk) 18:54, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

:Perhaps this is better under a new article anyway. I have copied the version that was reverted to New Hope for Britain, although a page move/rename would be better, in my opinion. -- Jttw (talk) 19:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Is this actually the original use of the phrase? I think John Osborne applied it to Jeffrey Bernard's Spectator column first, though I can't find an authoritative source for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnKozak (talk • contribs) 15:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Mitchell Heisman's "Suicide Note"

The uses of the phrase after September 2010 such as by Charles Krauthammer are incorrect.--KayWad (talk) 11:28, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Kaufman - really?

In pre-internet days the saying was attributed to Denis Healey. Something of this attribution survives in Laybourn, Keith: British Political Leaders: A Biographical Dictionary, p. 163. Harfarhs (talk) 17:14, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Should damaging personal opinion be used in place of real fact?

If Wilkpedia is to be consider a fact-based media outlet - and not a right-wing newspaper repeating damaging old smears - then should it not avoid highlighting personal opinion as if it was some kind historic fact? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.75.44 (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Questionable statement

The description of the 1983 United Kingdom general election defeat, as "Labour's worst result since the 1918 general election" is arguably misleading. Labour did record its lowest vote share since 1918, but in terms of number of seats won the 1983 result of 209 was far better than the party won in 1922 - 142, 1924 - 151, 1931 - 52, or 1935 -154. It was even better than the 191 seats Labour won in 1923 when it went on to form a minority government. Dunarc (talk) 22:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)