Talk:Marina Wheeler

Against Deletion

It might be suitable to delete this, but a better reason than "non notable spouse of a notable chap" isn't it! Stevingtonian (talk) 18:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I can't see any reliable secondary sources. Computerjoe's talk 19:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Spouse of the PM

I think that this should be added as an office (like with Philip May, Samantha Cameron, Sarah Brown, etc.) as, though temporary, it is true... 81.98.161.139 (talk) 14:58, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

This needs to be updated on Marina's page. Boris' page says they're divorced now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.179.110.131 (talk) 17:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Marina Wheeler

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Marina Wheeler's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "bbc-7-september":

• From Boris Johnson: "Boris Johnson and wife to divorce". BBC News. 7 September 2018. Retrieved 10 September 2018.
• From Spouse of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom: "Boris Johnson and wife to divorce". BBC News. 7 September 2018. Retrieved 10 September 2018.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:30, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Infobox

Now that the divorce is finalised (as described in Guardian) Wheeler is no longer the Spouse of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, however, she never assumed the role as divorce proceedings were going on when Johnson became PM. How is this "worded" in an infobox? SITH (talk) 12:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

She was married to the fellow when he was the prime minister. Not sure why you should want to spin it otherwise, least of all in the infobox. But feel free to come up with a suggestion. (Please resist quasi-political euphemism, half-truth and ambiguity, though!) I would think that if you want to dig into the deeper recesses of the nature and phases of the poor woman's marriage, the main body of the entry is the place to do it. Not sure why you should want to, however. Success Charles01 (talk) 15:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I have removed this from the infobox because I find it bizarre, frankly. Yes, technically she was for some time "spouse of the prime minister of the United Kingdom". She never acted as such, however. She never had any role as such at 10 Downing Street or in society. To have that in the infobox, alongside the name of the new wife of her former husband, is misleading and possibly a bit distasteful too. Surtsicna (talk) 16:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

It is not an office or a formal role, she did not need to perform any duties, all that is required is to be the spouse of the PM, which she was. De jure would have been added to represent that she was legally the spouse even if not acting as the spouse since they were separated. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 14:12, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

The reason "spouse of the prime minister" is a thing (and "spouse of the lord chancellor" is not) is because the prime minister's spouse is expected to have a role in society and at 10 Downing Street. She did not. Nobody is disputing the fact that she was indeed married to the prime minister. What I do not quite get is why that needs to be on the top of the infobox, along with rather absurd qualifications. Which reliable sources describe her as "spouse of the prime minister of the United Kingdom de jure" anyway? Surtsicna (talk) 14:19, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

What is expected of a PM's spouse is irrelevant, the only requirement is that they be married to the PM. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 15:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Pinging other users who have edited Wheeler's article for more input. @Neveselbert, JugulatorJJ, Philip Stevens, Keivan.f, Castlemore7, Comrade TruthTeller, Gertrude206, Charles01, StraussInTheHouse, and Bigwolf132: Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 15:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Surtsicna, I fail to see how a source needs to directly refer to Wheeler using "de jure" or "in absentia" or else us using those phrases here is original research. De jure "describes practices that are legally recognised, regardless of whether the practice exists in reality" and in absentia "a legal term, is Latin for "in the absence" or "while absent"". I wouldn't be opposed to it being reworded if you have a better suggestion, but how are these not accurate terms? Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 16:01, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the only requirement to be the spouse of the prime minister is to be married to a prime minister. But why does that need to be on the top of Marina Wheeler's biography? Why do the names of Philip May and her husband's new wife need to be there? Why should Template:Infobox politician be used when she has never been a politician? "De jure" and "in absentia" qualifications must be verifiable since we are defining the subject as such. Defining Wheeler as the UK prime minister's spouse "de jure" and "in absentia" is original research by synthesis unless reliable sources describe her as such, and I have yet to see anyone called that. Surtsicna (talk) 16:09, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't agree that it counts as synthesis; synth is about reaching new conclusions, while these phrases are just being used to show she was legally his spouse but they were separated and she was never in any official spouse role. But if you don't want it worded that way, do you have a suggestion on a rewording? They were separated, and at various points separated was used in the infobox. Some variations there have been: 1, 2, 3, 4. Looking through old sources from when they were still married, I can't see a source referring to her as "separated wife" or whatever—some refer to her as his "estranged wife" but I don't think that is suitable for the infobox—but I don't take wp:synth to mean you need to use the exact wording in the sources. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 16:40, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Let me put it this way. You are very unlikely to find a reliable source saying that Marina Wheeler had a tenure as "spouse of the prime minister of the United Kingdom" from 2019 to 2020. I dare say it is impossible to find any source mentioning Philip May as her predecessor in any capacity, and I very much doubt that RS will describe Carrie Symonds as Marina Wheeler's successor in the role of prime ministerial wife. Using legal jargon to make it all sound even more formal is only icing on this synthcake. Surtsicna (talk) 17:55, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Marina Wheeler QC
Born	Marina Claire Wheeler (1964-08-18) 18 August 1964 West Berlin, West Germany
Nationality	British
Education	European School, Brussels I
Alma mater	Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge
Occupations	Author barrister columnist
Known for	Spouse of the prime minister of the United Kingdom (separated) in 2019-20
Spouse	Boris Johnson ​ ​ (m. 1993; div. 2020)​
Children	4
Parent	Charles Wheeler (father)

Would it not be possible to use a correct infobox (e.g. Template:Infobox person) and have her technical status as prime ministerial wife be a bit subdued in it? It could at least not be in boldface in the heading and without names of non-related people or made-up qualifications. See an example to the left. Surtsicna (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I mean it’s not really productive to ask why certain things are done in a particular way. You might as well say why we have articles on spouses of PMs or first ladies/gentlemen to begin with. But I totally understand your viewpoint here. I guess it’s better for us to stick with what has been the traditional way of doing things while respecting the content from reliable sources. It is a fact that she was married to Johnson and thus she was spouse of the PM. Now the problem is that the spouse of the British PM doesn’t have a specific title, unlike the American president’s wife who is known as First Lady. That way we could have easily found out whether it was bestowed upon her or not. Well, since that’s not the case, I think we should acknowledge her position as spouse of the PM because that was not denied to her officially. But we can also avoid using terms such as ‘de jure’ and ‘in absentia’ if some users feel it might be original research. We can simply put ‘tenure’ for the dates, and keep the footnote to emphasize that they were actually separated, if we were to use Infobox politician. However, if the consensus is towards using Infobox person due to her case being unique, then we can go with what Surtsicna has suggested and just put the position under ‘Title’ with the dates. Keivan.f^Talk 16:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I changed the infobox template politician to officeholder (which is what it redirects to anyway) before I noticed this comment here. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 16:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Surely there should be a good reason for doing something a certain way. For example, the reason we have articles on the spouses is that the spouses tend to receive significant coverage in reliable sources. I believe there should likewise be a good reason for bringing up Philip May and Carrie Johnson in this biography. Not only did Wheeler have no specific title, she also played no role whatsoever in the capacity of prime minister's spouse. So I am still wondering why that technicality needs to be on the top of the infobox (along with some names and dates). Surtsicna (talk) 17:01, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

If it was a titled official ceremonial role like First Lady of the United States then Wheeler would likely have never been given the title however "Spouse of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom" is nothing more than pointing out who the Prime Minister is married to. There is no special title or "office" given to the Spouse of the Prime Minister the way FLOTUS is. Wheeler and Johnson were legally married during his tenure so she is a former Spouse of the Prime Minister. That's my opinion on the matter which was requested. JugulatorJJ (talk) 18:17, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

It's also worth noting that First Lady of the United States isn't necessarily the President's wife. The First Lady title is often given to the spouse of the president but there have been times when the title's been given to female relatives or friends of the president. The role is essentially "Hostess of the White House" not "Spouse of the President". "Spouse of the Prime Minister" is literally only stating a fact and it's a fact that Wheeler was the Spouse of the Prime Minsiter. We need to stop equating First Lady and Spouse. Spouse of the Prime Minsiter is not the U.K. equivalent to First Lady. There is no equivalent to that role in the U.K. JugulatorJJ (talk) 18:28, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Appending "tenure" dates and "predecessor" and "successor" names to infoboxes under bolded "Spouse of the prime minister of the United Kingdom" title is certainly equating UK prime ministerial spouses with US first ladies. It is also OR on Wikipedia's part, as reliable sources do not mention Philip May as Marina Wheeler's predecessor or her supposed tenure. Surtsicna (talk) 18:32, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think it is. It's merely stating who their husband/wife was during the Prime Minister's tenure and for how long. I honestly don't know why the list even exists as there's no title or office given to a Spouse of the Prime Minister. That being said there's nothing that makes Wheeler less valid than any of the others. As there is no office or title given there's no other requirement to be Spouse of the Prime Minister than literally being married to the Prime Minister. I'm pretty sure if the President was separated from his wife the woman would not be granted the title of First Lady. If Clinton won in 2016 i'm pretty sure they would be Mr. and Mrs. President not Mrs. President and the First Gentleman with Chelsea Clinton having the title of First Lady. JugulatorJJ (talk) 16:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

It is stating who the spouse is in a manner that suggests that being the spouse is an actual office. Case in point, the infoboxes used in this article so far are Template:Infobox politician and Template:Infobox officeholder. In addition to being named the way they are, the layout of these infoboxes is strongly associated with officeholders due to otherwise being applied only to officeholders biographies. The parameters used are called "office", "term_start", and "term_end". The infobox is not merely stating that Wheeler was a spouse; it is suggesting that she had an official role as such through the use of inappropriate infobox template and inappropriate wording. And most egregiously, it synthesizes information to state things that are never found in reliable sources. Surtsicna (talk) 17:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

At this point I think the reasonable thing to do would be choosing infobox person over the current one. That automatically solves the potential WP:OR issues, while keeping the necessary information with regard to her position as spouse of the PM and without putting to much emphasis on it, since she did not really fulfil any duties in that capacity. Keivan.f^Talk 03:16, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The WP:OR concern appears to relate to the "de jure" and "in absentia" bits in the "status" line within the info box. That's a bit niche for an infobox in the first place, I'd have thought. It could easily be relegated to the main body of the article if someone thinks it's a worthwhile thing to include in order to ensure that our readers get the opportunity to access an adequately complete version of truth. Using Anglo-Latin terms that some English lawyers invoke unnecessarily when addressing the more educationally deprived among their fellow-citizens is tiresome at the best of times. I would suggest that wikipedia should be concerned to avoid avoidable jargon of this nature. Especially as here. Especially in infoboxes.

If someone does want to spell out that (1) they were married to each other, and/but (2) the man was living with a mistress and not his wife and their children for some of the time covered by the marriage ... well, I guess that's fine, and maybe interesting enough to be simply stated in the body of the wiki-entry? And in English, in the event that you think wikipedia exists, in the first instance, not for the gratification of its learned contributors but for the information and instruction of its readers. Many of whom, in the case of English language wikipedia, do not have English as a mother tongue. Poor dears. Normally I would agree that the "infobox person" is generally to be preferred over the more tailored infoboxes in cases of doubt involving biographical entries. But as far as I remember, that would leave you unable to include the predecessor and successor in the infobox. It's all a question of judgement, of course. My judgement is that the inclusion of May P. and Symonds C. as predecessor and successor for Wheeler M. is a worthwhile infobox line in this instance, as in respect of all the other British prime ministerial spouses who've ended up with their own wiki-entries. Consistency. A succession box at the end of the page would, IM(h)O, be an unnecessarily clunky second best.

Be well Charles01 (talk) 06:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Charles01, how do you feel about the fact that reliable sources do not refer to Philip May and Carrie Symonds as Marina Wheeler's predecessor and successor, respectively, in any context? To me this borders on fancruft. Why should Wikipedia describe people the way they are not described in the world outside Wikipedia? Surtsicna (talk) 09:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Surtsicna: I think the problem is that we cannot exclude her either. Like, would it be accurate to put Carrie Johnson as the successor to Philip May? I don’t think so, because Wheeler was legally Boris’s spouse when he became PM and she remained so until their divorce; even though she did not fulfill the ceremonial duties that come with the position. I guess we shouldn’t alter the names of predecessors and successors in other articles or the list and keep the current sequence but I’m with you on using Infobox person, because she hasn’t really “served” as a spouse of the PM. It was Carrie Symonds who essentially was by Johnson’s side as a partner, accompanying him to different events, etc. Keivan.f^Talk 23:29, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Keivan.f, I do not think we should describe anyone as Philip May's "successor" because reliable sources do not do that. All of these "predecessor" and "successor" names need to go for the simple reason of spousal succession being a concept virtually invented on Wikipedia. But yes, let us start with Wheeler's biography. Surtsicna (talk) 09:09, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Link from Laura Lettuce

Leads to page of Lara Johnson-Wheeler but does not mention the surname Lettuce. 77.101.240.173 (talk) 12:55, 11 June 2023 (UTC)