Wikipedia

Last week I was asked some questions at a meeting based on wildly inaccurate information about myself and my views. I was told the basis for the questions came from Wikipedia so I looked up my entry.

I understand it is not the done thing to correct your own entry, so instead for greater accuracy I will record here where the entry is factually inaccurate, and also where it is particularly misleading.

Factual errors

I am not currently the co chairman of the Conservative Party Policy Review on Competitiveness. That job ended in 2010.
I do not act as the Leave means Leave pressure group spokesman
I am not Corporate Affairs Adviser at Concentric PLC
I have not been non executive chairman of Mabey Securities this decade
I completed and received a D Phil – not a PHD – at All Souls College, Oxford, not at St Anthony’s
I was elected to a fellowship by examination at All Souls in 1972 which led on later to a Distinguished fellowship.
I did not write an investment column “recommending investors pull their money out of the UK”

Misleading impressions

I have never spoken or written against civil partnerships and gay marriage and am not proposing any change to current laws. I regard the debate about capital punishment as being over and do not support its reintroduction. I never spoke or wrote in its favour.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

39 Comments

  1. APL
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

    “I was told the basis for the questions came from Wikipedia so I looked up my entry.”

    Wikipedia is a festering cesspool of Marxist agitprop. Pay no attention to it.

    It’s a lost cause.

    Try Infogalactic instead.

  2. Peter
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

    ‘Not the done thing to correct your own entry’ That seems rather strange.

    How does an entry get changed then?

    Any errors in a newspaper are swiftly addressed. Lawyers are sometimes involved in more serious cases if there is any hint of libel.

    • G Wilson
      Posted February 16, 2018 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

      Wikipedia will change false claims only under credible threat of legal action.

      • sm
        Posted February 18, 2018 at 4:32 pm | Permalink

        I don’t think you are correct, G Wilson. There are proper procedures for correcting false and possibly libellous statements on Wiki, who are keen to improve their reputation for accuracy.

        John should most definitely contact them and require removal of this fake information, and should there be attempts to reinstate them, Wiki will take action to lock down the site.

  3. Lifelogic
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    You say:- I did not write an investment column “recommending investors pull their money out of the UK”

    Well given that we have socialist/interventionist T May and tax ’till the economy dies Hammond at the tiller and Corbyn & McDonnall waiting menacingly in the wings perhaps you should do one now?

    Then again perhaps will be get a sensible leader for the new election replace 15% stamp duty, pension mugger and IHT ratter Hammond, win a comfortable majority and the economy will boom for three plus terms – with some Real Brexit Tories in charge at long last?

    Who knows – 50/50 perhaps?

  4. duncan
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    ‘Misleading impressions’.

    I can think of a less diplomatic, more colourful description but I’d be banned from the site if I suggested it

    Attempts to discredit you is indication enough of your influence.

    What a shame Wikipedia can’t be forced to reveal the identity of the person or organisation who felt the need to do such a thing

    It shows you’re doing something right!

  5. Lifelogic
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 1:26 pm | Permalink

    Wiki should say something like JR has been proved right on almost all political & economic, investment and energy issues for thirty + years. As a result of which he has been largely kept away from the very top jobs. This as being right & rational are so rarely rewarded in politics. Some say does very well indeed for someone with a History Degree.

    Then again in business or gambling however being right is highly rewarded.

    In particular he was right on the ERM, the EURO, Brexit and “no change no chance” with the dire John Major.

    We are in the same position now with T May alas now.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted February 16, 2018 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

      JR was even right on the absurdly damaging climate change act. Well almost due to party loyalty he abstained. Voting against would have made little difference as it went through 463/5 such is the dire quality of the unscientific, innumerate, group think fools we have in parliament.

      The cost was £300 Billion according to Peter Lilley as below. Probably an underestimate given all the industries & jobs it had destroyed already. When will these dopes finally see sense? How many more years of no warming are needed?

      https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2016/12/CCACost-Dec16.pdf

  6. MickN
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

    …oh and you are not the antichrist nut job with three heads. Perhaps someone might like to correct Mrs Sourbry as well as wiki.

  7. stred
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/gallery/2010/jan/22/aliens-science-fiction

    Even the Guardian has made clear that you are not an alien and that this was unkind. But mud sticks and it still prevents promotion to use the talents of a much smarter politician than average.

  8. Anonymous
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

    My Wiki entry says I partake in ‘hactivism’, whatever that is.

    Whom do I sue ??? I do not want my good name besmirched this way.

  9. British Spy
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

    On Wiki, List of British Spies . I’m not on., then again I could be.

    • miami.mode
      Posted February 16, 2018 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

      BS…….and I thought you were listed as Agent Cob.

  10. agricola
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

    Will never make Wiki, accurate or not. Keep your head down, low profile and only vulnerable to ricochets. When you get a chance go back to Boris Speech and moderate to inform JB.

    • agricola
      Posted February 16, 2018 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

      Muchas Gracias

  11. Satan
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

    Snap

  12. Paul
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    “I regard the debate about capital punishment as being over and do not support its reintroduction.”

    Interesting you say the debate is over – now we are leaving the EU surely the debate is just beginning as we will have the power to bring it back as an independent nation. It can only happen via a referendum of course which the politicians wont give us because they know the majority of British people have always been in favour of its reintroduction, albeit a slim one.

  13. Andy
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

    Glad to hear it. The death penalty – while popular -is morally indefensible.

    And gay marriage is this best thing any Conservative government has done since the war.

    I say this as a married heterosexual man with children.

  14. Prigger
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

    I’m not in Wikipedia. Dictionaries just say I am a thief. A lie! I have never stolen anything. As I always say, honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.

  15. mancunius
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    JR, That lie that you have advocated ‘moving money out of the UK’ is often repeated by Remoaners. Having read your 3 November FT article on investment sector recommendations that started this particular lie, it’s perfectly clear to any sane reader what you meant. You were (quite justly in my view) criticizing BoE and Treasury budgetary policies that are preventing the UK economy from moving forward. Your FT ETF portfolio continues to contain all its holdings, including UK property and UK government bonds. Your final summary was “The FT Fund is benefiting in particular from its accent on US technology and Asian growth. I see no need at the moment to change a winning formula.”
    But because of the headline, “Time to look further afield as UK economy hits the brakes” – which as any fule kno was written by a sub-editor at the FT – the Remoaners have chosen to confuse your critique of government fiscal policy and your statement of *continued* investment in your preferred growth areas with a change of direction, and a capital flight from the UK. It just goes to show that all this alleged Remainer ‘concern’ with the country’s post-Brexit future is financial (as well as literal) illiteracy.

  16. Anonymous
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

    Off topic pertaining to the thread on the IMF and concerns about UK education:

    Pass rates are through the roof at GCSE and A level, so much that they’ve had to add an extra star to scoring and we now have A** grade !

    More people are going to university than ever !!!

    (sarcasm)

  17. Adam
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

    Those who assess properly, do so on the quality of what you do. Sensible folk will recognise the goodness that prevails. Others who make judgements influenced by what is loosely written, without evidence, apply lower standards to their own understanding. Ultimately, true is indestructible & reacts. Attempts to distort, create shining pathways from the origin of deception, directly the source of wrongdoing, wherever they lie.

  18. Richard1
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    A disgrace this is so inaccurate. it sounds like deliberate falsification

  19. William Long
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

    It is very hard to know where Wiki gets a lot of its information from. Would you like one of us to correct the article? I would happily do so; I have had to make plenty of necessary corrections to articles about my own family though I do not feature personally!

  20. Miss Brandreth-Jones
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 7:07 pm | Permalink

    My wiki entry does not exist .. but I do! seriously; I do usually believe this entries on Wikipedia.

  21. getahead
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 7:44 pm | Permalink

    Well said John.

  22. gyges
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

    I’m pleased you didn’t correct your wikipedia entry. I find many errors on wikipedia which reminds me not to believe anything on it.

  23. rose
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

    Unfortunately every third rate hack is going to go to Wikpedia before they do their hatchet job. I think a friend or relation should amend the entry. I am sure that is what other victims benefit from.

  24. margaret howard
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 11:38 pm | Permalink

    “I did not write an investment column “recommending investors pull their money out of the UK”

    This particular claim is very damaging indeed for anyone. If they won’t correct it why don’t you sue?

    • Helen Smith
      Posted February 18, 2018 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

      That claim has already entered Remainer folklore, it needs correcting but they will continue to believe it.

  25. Dennis Zoff
    Posted February 16, 2018 at 11:54 pm | Permalink

    Dear John

    “Confidence isn’t rooted in the thoughts of others”

    What others say is unimportant, but what you say is very important…and you do a pretty good job in my book, without wishing to patronise! Many thanks

  26. FrankG
    Posted February 17, 2018 at 4:10 am | Permalink

    Well John, am glad we cleared that one up..what’s not so clear now however is where Mrs May is trying to get to..today it is reported we are all concerned with security now for the UK and the EU for after we leave..mrs may says she is concetned about security for other european countries..but the question is why? We are leaving, taking back control of our borders so why should we be in any way concerned about EU security into the future? Let them fend for themselves..Mrs Merkel who is still not in government yet, is curious about our position..I must say I am a littlw curious myself.

  27. percy openshaw
    Posted February 17, 2018 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    Dear Mr Redwood, Wikipedia is a pernicious and misleading institution. It cannot be allowed to continue spreading misinformation about you or anyone else. Surely it is time to raise this issue in parliament and prevent what amounts to the organised libel of anyone with conservative opinions?

  28. Tony Harrison
    Posted February 17, 2018 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    I did not write an investment column “recommending investors pull their money out of the UK”
    I’ve come across this assertion about you several times, cited by Leftists and Remainers: I wonder where it originated?

    • Winston
      Posted February 19, 2018 at 7:13 pm | Permalink

      In the FT. Google it

  29. Epikouros
    Posted February 17, 2018 at 10:22 am | Permalink

    False, manipulated, poorly researched, misinterpreted information all contribute to the plethora of misinformation that politicians, the media and many others peddle as indisputable truth. In the name of controlling the narrative everybody is trying to out propaganda everybody else and being either lazy or gullible or credulous or just plain stupid we agree with whichever one suits our partisan bias which we latch onto and repeat as gospel.

    In this age of mass communication the liar, the deceitful, the mischievous, the #metoo and other villains have a multitude of platforms on which they can spew their vitriol or plead their victimhood or promote their unappetising causes. Wikipedia, twitter, facebook, newspapers/publishers(who have been guilty of it for centuries) and broadcasters(the BBC being one of the most pernicious considering it’s charter and breath of influence) to name just a few. There is truth in the old adage “never believe a word of what you are told and only half of what you read”.

  30. Ron Olden
    Posted February 17, 2018 at 9:52 pm | Permalink

    Mr Redwood is right when he says it’s not thought ‘the done thing’ to change your own Wiki entry.

    But it’s perfectly proper, to change it if it contains palpable factual errors, that only he can verify. That’s how Wiki is supposed to work. It’s a communal resource where we all share what we know.

    Not very long ago I noticed that Michael Moseley (the TV presenter), s entry, said he was the son, (or grandson or nephew, I can’t remember exactly), of Sir Oswald Moseley. So I sent him an email and his people changed it themselves.

  31. goap
    Posted February 19, 2018 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    Now you have published this update which is on your website, it is perfectly legitimate for you, or anyone, to amend the page referencing this blog entry as the source.

  32. Loudbarker
    Posted February 21, 2018 at 2:44 pm | Permalink

    Well said on the death penalty.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page