This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Margaret Thatcher article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Margaret Thatcher is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LincolnshireWikipedia:WikiProject LincolnshireTemplate:WikiProject LincolnshireLincolnshire
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2020, when it received 10,401,057 views.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report7 times. The weeks in which this happened:
The WaPo source says this: "A source said that it was decided at this meeting to make an attempt to obtain permission from British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to use the bombers. The British acceded to the U.S. request after expressing initial reservations, officials said." Martinevans123 (talk) 17:41, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just started editing on Wikipedia so I am still learning, but I was wondering whether it would be appropriate to put "Prime Minister of the UK" and "Imperial or Candian Privi Counceler" under occupations? Thanks in advance for helping me understand this. Heraldic Nerd (talk) 23:58, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neveselbert, scholarly sources don’t describe her as a stateswoman, they only say this when talking about how she presents her public image. The definition of stateswoman [1] is an experienced female politician, especially one who is respected for making good judgments, which is nowhere near neutral enough for WP:WIKIVOICE and just looks like WP:FANCRUFT. Pinging Borgenland who has experience with this Kowal2701 (talk) 12:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Same reservations for that word on hagiographical and PR grounds and especially given her nuanced legacy (what to make of her “romance” with Pinochet and her gray record on South Africa for example). Nevertheless, I think a greater discussion must be had on the relevant projects (Biography and Politics). Borgenland (talk) 12:45, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure those things matter much. Someone like Bismarck is the classic statesman, and he hardly has a morally blemish-free record. Julius Ceasar is called a statesman on his article and he killed a million Gauls on his own testimony. LastDodo (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is that Thatcher is a very polarising figure in the UK, Yougov says For example, more than once we have asked people their opinion on who was the greatest of the post-war prime ministers. Margaret Thatcher wins by some distance. We have also asked who was the worst. Again, Margaret Thatcher comes out on top. Presenting her as widely respected is pretty disingenuous, she's despised in parts of the country (particularly the old industrial heartlands), and some celebrated her death. Kowal2701 (talk) 12:53, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I know she is polarising, I'm just not sure that disqualifies her from being a stateswoman. What counts is what the word 'stateswoman' means, and whether she meets that criteria. Nothing else. She can hardly be more polarising than Caesar was in his own time, who started a civil war and made himself dictator before being assassinated. Note that I'm not necessarily arguing she should be considered a stateswoman, only that her moral blemishes and polarising nature are not relevant, at least they don't seem to disqualify others from being given that label. LastDodo (talk) 14:52, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(responding to ping) My view remains unchanged: stateswoman is a term supported by reliable sources, including Oxford Reference and her official death certificate. Its use is neither undue nor in violation of policy, and polarisation alone does not preclude its applicability. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk·contribs·email) 04:47, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with user Neveselber. As time passes, her polarising effect becomes less relevant anyway, even if it ever were relevant to her position as a stateswoman. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 07:14, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Her death certificate isn’t relevant to us here, it’s a primary source and obv far from WP:BESTSOURCES. I assume the Oxford Reference source you’re referring to is this in the Dictionary of Contemporary World History. It is a good source, but one source alone doesn’t make it due or npov, and a later edition of it [2] doesn’t use it. Though there are more like [3][4][5] (all sources mentioned here are tertiary sources). However her entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography [6], arguably our best source, doesn’t call her that, neither do her entries in [7][8][9][10][11]. Her entry in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Women in World History [12] opens by saying Thatcher remains a controversial figure.! (and unsurprisingly doesn’t use it). Feel free to share more sources, but 4/12 (3/11 if we discard an old edition) means it isn’t npov, and it’s given disproportionate weight relative to its use in sources to be used in the first sentence. Kowal2701 (talk) 07:25, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there is agreement that RSSs are the measure to use, as there appears to be, a quick view of google scholar (margaret thatcher "stateswoman") brings up many sources, including this book [13] entitled "A Communication Perspective on Margaret Thatcher: Stateswoman of the Twentieth Century". Should not the status of stateswoman, an interstate description, be seen more through the eyes of those outside the UK? That would remove most of the sources that deal with her polarising effect in the UK, and in her day. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:01, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we’d by going off-piste a bit there regarding our policies, imo we ought to trust the best academic sources to transcend polarisation more associated with tabloids (and all of the above are recent). Regarding the book, I can’t find anything on the author but nowhere actually in the book is stateswoman used, just in the title, which imo we shouldn’t use per WP:HEADLINES, it appears to have been a marketing choice. I also wouldn’t call it a best source on thatcher’s life as it’s about media comms and is secondary. From my search on google scholar, sources don’t call her it in their own voice (but none of the above sources came up at all). I wanted to look through entries in Springer’s collection of encyclopedias but their inbuilt search engine is rubbish Kowal2701 (talk) 08:14, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated A-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
.svg)
.jpg){kind=small}
