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.
David Cameron was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Berkshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Berkshire 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.BerkshireWikipedia:WikiProject BerkshireTemplate:WikiProject BerkshireBerkshire articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s 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.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s articles
This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
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 has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report3 times. The weeks in which this happened:
Now the Tories are out of government and he is no longer Foreign Secretary we might as well return the lead picture to being his Prime Minister portrait from 2010 as that's the highest ranking job he's had, what he's best known for and him as Foreign Secretary isn't current anymore 92.239.82.188 (talk) 11:15, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think the Cameron 2010 Portrait is such bad quality (very weird lighting, odd facial expression), that it'd be better to keep the Foreign Secretary Portrait, which is better in all the aforementioned regards FredMcKinley (talk) 21:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree with the three above, it is standard practice for very notable individuals to use a picture taken during the time they were in such a noteworthy position, including if they had served in an office following their tenure. Take former Vice President Walter Mondale for example, he was Vice President in the 70s but later served as ambassador in the 90s with an updated portrait, however that portrait isn't in the lead and instead is in the section about him serving as ambassador. The same should be done for Cameron, as his foreign secretary portrait is him over a decade older than his official portrait. TheFellaVB (talk) 20:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the difference between Mondale and Cameron is that Cameron's portrait is (in my opinion) atrocious, while Mondale's isn't. As for precedents, Ted Heath's picture is from 1987, even though he was last Prime Minister around 20 years prior in 1974 and there are lower quality pictures available to use FredMcKinley (talk) 23:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. In the cases of both Heath and Cameron, the pictures used for the infoboxes are high quality and far preferable to alternative options, such as the poor quality Cameron premiership photo. Worth noting also that Margaret Thatcher's portrait, while closer to the time of her premiership than the Heath and Cameron photos, also isn't one taken while she was PM. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Similar case with Blair too. Lead image is from after his premiership. A rather low quality official portrait from 1997 is also available, but it isn't used. ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. That practice is usually for deceased individuals (i.e. Elizabeth II and Robert Mugabe had modern pictures for their lead images but after their deaths had them changed to historical ones). Even if we ignore that, politicians otherwise tend to have their most recent official portrait used for the lead image, so it would be unwise to make an exception here. While Cameron was likely more notable as PM than Foreign Secretary, the 2010 PM portrait is 14 years out of date and, while he admittedly looks pretty much the same as he did back then, that portrait is also of a rather low quality and looks quite amateur, unlike the 2023 one which actually does look official. For these reasons, I'd much prefer if we kept to the status quo and continued to use the official portrait from 2023 as at present. ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 21:00, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(which have resulted in large overlap of content between this article and David Cameron as Leader of the Opposition) I had a look at the histories of a few other politician articles, and see there has been large movements, removal, and duplication of content by TCOGW with Keir Starmer to various sub articles, and with Rishi Sunak the same, and with Jeremy Hunt, Nigel Farage, John Swinney, Tony Blair, and several others the same. What is going on? Shouldn't these major restructuring and splitting and diffusing of content exercises be scrutinised, discussed and agreed on somewhere first? -- DeFacto (talk). 16:28, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree with your reasoning. I can't speak for the other editor, but these types of edits are not ones I will be pursuing in future. So, I've made David Cameron as Leader of the Opposition a redirect link to avoid content duplication. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lead image
Time we change his lead (infobox) image back to his main portrait as Prime Minister. The 2023 portrait in use worked from November 2023 to July 2024 due to his return to government, but with Labour's victory in this year's general election, they have taken over government. So it's time to bring Cameron's image back to the portrait taken during his time in office as Prime Minister as this was his highest rank and what he is inarguably best known for. 92.236.118.94 (talk) 02:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
Done ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 02:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)