Talk:William Morris, 1st Viscount Nuffield

	Biography portal 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 supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage.

Automobiles Mid‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles 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.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

University of Oxford Mid‑importance

	University of Oxford portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Thuis is a rather long winded title isn't it, how many people are going to type in William Morris, 1st Viscount Nuffield to the search engine. Surely it was better where it was. G-Man 23:14, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Most people aren't going to type in William Morris (industrialist) either. They would just type in William Morris, be directed to the article on said individual, and from there be directed here. Between (industrialist) and Viscount Nuffield, I prefer the latter, because it is accurate and technically correct, while the former would be preferred if no other method were available. -- Lord Emsworth 02:08, Jan 14, 2004 (UTC)

Both Viscount Nuffield and Lord Nuffield redirect to here, so the present title seems fine. 94.119.64.9 (talk) 09:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support for fascism

A paragraph concerning his financial support for the British Union of Fascists should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.32.130 (talk) 01:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relevant link: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/library/special/bunion.--94.119.64.19 (talk) 16:43, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Morris is reputed to have made donations to all major political parties in the UK at different stages of his life. I wonder what he sat under in the House of Lords, or was he just a cross-bencher?18:33, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Is there no photograph of the man?

Is there a photograph of W. R. Morris, 1st Viscount Nuffield? Preferably one taken before 1923, or one by a photographer who died more than seventy years ago? No signature (talk) 01:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mini and Jaguar? Wasn't Lord Nuffield retired/dead by then?

I cannot understand why a thumbnail of the Mini appears in an article about William Morris, 1st Viscount Nuffield. From what I understand, the Mini was created by order of Leonard Lord. One would presume that Lord was chairman of BMC by that time, and that Morris would have retired by then.

Oddly enough, despite using an news article titled "Lord Nuffield's Retirement" as a source, the article does not clearly state when Morris retired from BMC. One would presume that he retired shortly (a day or two) before the news article was published on 18 December 1952.

The article, which is about William Morris, 1st Viscount Nuffield, goes on to mention the merger with Jaguar in 1966 to form British Motor Holdings. While one is left to presume Morris's status regarding the Mini, the article clearly states that the good Lord Nuffield left this Earth to meet his Good Lord in August 1963, three years before the merger with Jaguar. It is therefore clear that he had nothing whatsoever to do with that merger, and therefore unclear as to why it is mentioned, not only in the article on his already-ended life, but in the section headed "Career".

Then, of course, there is the statement about him being "the most famous industrialist of his age," which is a truly odd statement to be made about any contemporary of Henry Ford. As far as I know, there is no theory of economics or production management called "Morrisism" and no notable science fiction novel in which either Viscount Nuffield or the Morris Cowley is worshipped as a god.

Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 03:37, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be no defence of these entries. Does anyone object to their removal? Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 13:40, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There being no defence of these entries, I shall remove them. I'll leave up the cited "most famous industrialist of his age" for now, but I still protest any contemporary of Henry Ford being so called. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 16:15, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile, I have noticed an unambiguous mistake in the article: "... but by May 1940, the height of the Battle of Britain..." May 1940 was the height of the Battle of France; the British Expeditionary Force was evacuated from Dunkirk toward the end of that month! Removal of the perceived irrelevances can wait some more for interested parties to raise an objection; correction of the incorrect statement shall be done forthwith. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 13:40, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A paedophile?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3328430/Prostituted-12-mother-Morris-Minor-icon-Lord-Nuffield-titan-British-philanthropy-founded-Oxford-college-victim-lifetime-silence-reveals-shattering-police-testimony.html

217.39.67.141 (talk) 02:35, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed - Morris appears to be an early harbinger of Jimmy Savile in the previous generation, but not yet dealt with nor recognised as such.--94.119.64.9 (talk) 16:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of any other ‘sources‘ than the Daily Mail (generally considered unreliable), and a mention on Facebook, there is some doubt about the veracity of this claim. No other news source appears to have picked this up. 94.119.64.0 (talk) 06:10, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1) Twitter as well as Facebook; 2) the Mail's notorious unreliability is associated with its excursions into political mass-brainwashing rather than anything else, is it not?; 3) does the regurgitated version in the relevant Mail on Sunday give the claim more of a Sabbath respectability?; 4) the Mail remains, for all of that, a national institution, and one that remains unchallenged in court on this story for over two years.--94.119.64.19 (talk) 16:40, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]