Talk:Jimmy Savile

His knighthood was posthumously removed. ~2025-43765-49 (talk) 23:20, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Good luck finding a reliable source for that. We don't base article content on random stuff people claim. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:58, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

as it 'dies with the person' shouldn't it be removed and revoked from this page?? Microxstephn (talk) 02:49, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

The current opening sentences read:

"Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile (/ˈsævɪl/; 31 October 1926 – 29 October 2011) was an English media personality and DJ. He was known for his eccentric image, charitable work, and hosting the BBC shows Top of the Pops and Jim'll Fix It."

At this point, is it really true that people remember him for these nice and wonderful things, or because he was a sexual predator? And yet, it isn't until the 3rd sentence where it begins to discuss the fact that the police consider him to be one of the UK's most prolific sexual predators.

It would be like the page for Ted Kaczynski only talking about him being a math prodigy and not a domestic terrorist or that Hitler, who like Savile died before being convicted, was an art enthusiast and politician. Being neutral doesn't mean being nice; if there's well-sourced articles that say someone was an awful human being, you can just label them as an awful human. Srshouse (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

There needs to be some context, because history is not written backwards. Savile was a successful celebrity for decades and had the rich and powerful eating out of his hand, and at the time of his funeral he was still regarded as a national treasure. It didn't last long, and within 18 months of his death his reputation was in ruins.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:08, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

Context goes both ways - just because he died before his crimes came to light (or, probably more accurately, because people were scared to accuse him while he was still alive because he had such a strong public reputation) doesn't mean what he did should be minimized or ignored.

As you said yourself, shortly after his death his reputation was in ruins. And yet the first bit of his article, which is what will show up in search results and previews, speaks glowingly of him as if it was written by his PR agent.

Here's another comparison, an American football coach who used his charity to gain access to victims:

"Gerald Arthur Sandusky (born January 26, 1944) is an American convicted serial child molester and retired college football coach." Srshouse (talk) 08:17, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

unfortunately he wasn't convicted tho Microxstephn (talk) 02:52, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

searching him on Google pulls the top part of the article, specifically this part.

Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile was an English media personality and DJ. He was known for his eccentric image, charitable work, and hosting the BBC shows Top of the Pops and Jim'll Fix It.

To anyone not knowledgeable about him, from that would think he was a great person. This is a slap in the face to anyone affected by this predatory sex offender, as it's confirmed later in the article, this need to be in the 1st section that Google pulls through. Pushbutton1 (talk) 11:11, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED. Sugar Tax (talk) 11:12, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

This has been discussed before, and the opening paragraph and the overall WP:LEAD give enough weight to the controversy. Savile pulled the wool over people's eyes for many years and was never prosecuted or convicted during his lifetime. Also, Wikipedia has no control over what external search engines say, they are a law unto themselves.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:41, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Sexual predator and pedophile should be at the top of the first parragraph. ~2026-16562-42 (talk) 03:09, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before posting an edit request. Cannolis (talk) 03:31, 16 March 2026 (UTC)