Talk:David and Stephen Flynn

NPOV Issue

@SabLovesSunshine - i've reverted your changes. The inclusion of primary journal material to suggest that the twins were right is WP:OR.

per WP:BRD the previous version is the long-standing version, and the removal of info about a controversial podcast episode is probably incorrect. In general, as long as their are multiple sources discussing a negative episode in a WP:PUBLICFIGURE's life, we can include info about it. We also should not equate WP:FALSEBALANCE with WP:NPOV. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Replying to your comments on FTN:

1. “Medical Misinformation” -> “Health Advice and Public Response”

The health advice was wrong and condemned by medical specialists.

2. Peer-reviewed studies and mainstream media articles

Unless there is a source that connects peer-reviewed studies to what Flynn was saying, inclusion of this material is WP:SYNTH in the article.

3. Efforts to clarify the Flyns’ acknowledgment of errors

The apology is noted in the original long-standing version, alongside the reactions. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 18:26, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Clarify

In April 2023 they issued an apology for an episode of their podcast which they admitted misled and misinformed listeners. In the show, their guest Zach Bush made incorrect claims

Does the April 2023 apology in the first sentence refer to the show with Zach Bush in the second sentence? If yes, it should be "Zach Bush had made incorrect claims". If no, the two sentences should not be in the same paragraph. --Hob Gadling (talk) 09:42, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it refers to the show with Zach Bush. SabLovesSunshine (talk) 08:59, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Article needs more basic information

As is often the case, I think one of the reasons the medical misinformation section may seem out of place is the lack of basic relevant information which makes the misinformation section predominate excessively, plus the article is just plain confusing to people who've never heard of them before. At this is me, I'll give simple example. Our article currently says "as a result have been nicknamed "Hummus Jedward" and "Vegward"". But why? I mean the Jedward bit is explained, but why vegward? My guess was they are vegetarians or at least primarily promote a plant based diet. And indeed there's a source headline which suggests they might even be vegans. But this isn't explained anywhere in our article. Likewise where did the nickname Happy Pear come from? I guess it probably came from their business, given the age of it, but this isn't stated and it's hardly uncommon businesses are named after existing nicknames. I assume these details must be in sources otherwise I question their notability. Even what their business does is unknown other than what you can guess from its name. Nil Einne (talk) 05:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Request to Update Article for Neutrality and Accuracy

Hi everyone,

I would like to propose an update to the “David and Stephen Flynn” article.

Over the past few years, the page has focused heavily on a narrow set of controversies, and does not reflect a neutral point of view (NPOV) as per Wikipedia guidelines. Significant parts of the Flynn brothers’ careers — including their published work, community health advocacy, media contributions, and business growth — have been underrepresented or omitted.

I have prepared a proposed update that: • Expands early life, career, and community contributions using independent, reliable sources (Irish Times, Irish Independent, The Times (UK), RTÉ, etc.) • Acknowledges public controversies factually and neutrally, based on cited mainstream sources. • Provides a more balanced and encyclopedic presentation of their public work.

Full citations have been included from high-quality secondary sources. The intent is simply to meet Wikipedia’s standards for neutrality, accuracy, and comprehensiveness.

I am happy to share the draft here if needed before making any edits.

Thanks very much for your consideration!

93.107.43.97 (talk) 19:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

see WP:BOLD. you may ask for permission if you want, but understand also WP:BRD and WP:ONUS.

If folks object to your edits and you are not able to convince them, the status quo will remain. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 20:03, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the note and policy pointers — understood.

I’ll proceed carefully, following WP:BOLD while ensuring everything I add is properly cited and written in a neutral tone. If anyone has concerns as edits are made, I’m happy to discuss them here. 185.233.177.207 (talk) 09:28, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Proposed revision to "Medical misinformation" section – request for feedback

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi everyone,

I’d like to propose a revision to the current “Medical misinformation” section to improve its neutrality and tone while preserving all key facts and criticisms already cited. This section has seen previous reverts, so I want to be fully transparent and collaborative.

The current wording is somewhat weighted in tone and may not fully align with Wikipedia’s Biographies of Living Persons (BLP) guidelines on neutrality. My proposed draft keeps all the criticisms and sources intact (e.g., Liz O’Riordan, David Grimes, Irish Independent, Irish Times, etc.) but reframes them with a more encyclopedic tone and balanced language.

Here is the proposed draft for discussion:

== Public Controversies and Responses ==

In April 2022, David and Stephen Flynn faced criticism following the publication of a video in which they discussed breast cancer rates and the potential role of diet in cancer prevention. Medical professionals, including cancer surgeon Liz O’Riordan and cancer scientist David Robert Grimes, expressed concerns that some of the claims were overly simplistic and lacked appropriate scientific context.

The Flynn brothers subsequently deleted the video and issued a public apology, acknowledging they had “stepped outside their lane” and were “ignorant” of the complexities involved. They appeared on RTÉ’s Ray D’Arcy Show to discuss the backlash, where they addressed criticism of their initial apology video and reaffirmed their intention to focus on their areas of expertise.

In April 2023, they issued a second apology after an episode of their podcast featuring US-based physician Dr. Zach Bush was criticised for promoting unverified medical claims. A spokesperson for The Happy Pear stated it was never their intention to mislead and said they would take steps to better vet podcast guests and content.

Following these incidents, the Flynn brothers stated in interviews that they remain committed to evidence-based communication and have since focused their public work on plant-based nutrition, community wellbeing, and sustainability.

I welcome feedback, concerns, or suggested improvements from other editors before making any changes. My intention is to ensure this section adheres to Wikipedia’s standards on verifiability, neutrality, and fairness in coverage of public figures.

Thanks! Calmsea123456 (talk) 10:32, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Not an improvement. You seem to want to remove the sources and several sourced details. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:37, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, Hob Gadling.

To clarify, my intention with the proposed revision was not to remove any sources or relevant criticisms. I’ve retained all original citations (e.g., to Liz O’Riordan, David Robert Grimes, RTÉ, and the Irish Independent), and the major events remain in place: the April 2022 breast cancer video controversy, the Ray D’Arcy Show apology, the Zach Bush podcast episode, and the 2023 statement.

The goal is simply to improve encyclopedic tone, ensure compliance with BLP policy, and reflect Wikipedia’s standards on neutrality—not to sanitize or whitewash any controversy.

If there are specific details or sources you feel have been removed that shouldn’t be, I’d really appreciate it if you could point them out so I can address them directly.

Thanks again for taking the time to engage. Calmsea123456 (talk) 09:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Request for Reinstatement of Reverted Article Expansion (May 2025)

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hello editors,

I recently made a series of good-faith edits to this article aimed at improving its structure, neutrality, and coverage. These were rolled out gradually between late April and early May 2025 and expanded the following sections:

• Early Life and Education
• Career Beginnings
• Business Growth and Expansion
• Books and Media Appearances
• Community Engagement and Advocacy
• Personal Life

The updates were carefully cited with dozens of reliable, independent sources, including The Irish Times, Irish Independent, Irish Examiner, RTÉ, ITV, NBC’s Today Show, and the Irish Book Awards. The content adheres to Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View and Biographies of Living Persons policies, and was live for up to a week without objection before being reverted in bulk.

For transparency and collaboration, I’ve saved the full expanded draft here:

🔗 User:Calmsea123456

I would greatly appreciate your feedback and invite discussion about reinstating this content — or any modifications that might help it gain consensus. My intent is to improve encyclopedic quality and better reflect the subject’s notability and public record. I’m open to feedback or partial reinstatement based on consensus.

Thanks in advance for your consideration.

Kind regards,

Calmsea123456

---

📚 Examples of Reliable Sources Used:

• The Irish Times: “The unstoppable ascent of The Happy Pear” “Peak twins: The Flynn brothers…”
• Irish Independent: Coverage of their wedding, crowdfunding campaign, and interviews
• Irish Examiner: “We want people to feel amazing”; “Brothers in business”
• NBC Today Show segment (2024): Chickpea curry & dessert demo
• Netflix / Irish Central: Appearance in Somebody Feed Phil
• UCD Alumni: Stephen Flynn’s academic profile
• Dublin Airport: Launch of their plant-based café
• Jamie Oliver Food Tube: Feature and collaboration

Calmsea123456 (talk) 19:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

This appears to be AI generated. Don't expect us to vet chatgpt generated text for hallucinations/accuracy. 74.254.224.7 (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. Just to clarify, all added material was manually verified and based on high-quality, independent sources — including The Irish Times, RTÉ, Irish Independent, NBC’s Today Show, Apple TV, ITV, Newstalk, and others.

These edits were not AI-generated in any copy-paste sense. Every sentence was reviewed, fact-checked, and properly cited with reliable sources.

I welcome any specific feedback on content, tone, or citations and am happy to revise collaboratively to improve the article’s encyclopedic quality. Calmsea123456 (talk) 09:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Update – 16 May 2025

Following no objections after 7+ days, I’ve restored the “Early Life and Education” section and added the “Career Beginnings” section, merging it into the existing “Careers” content for continuity. All material is cited from reliable sources and aligns with Wikipedia’s BLP and NPOV guidelines.

Happy to collaborate on any suggested improvements. Thanks again to everyone who’s contributed so far!

— [[User:Calmsea123456]] Calmsea123456 (talk) 10:14, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Update – 18 May 2025:

Following no objections, I’ve now added the “Business Growth and Expansion” section to further improve coverage and structure. Happy to make collaborative revisions if needed.

--Calmsea123456 (talk) 18:39, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

I share the same concerns as 74.254.224.7, as almost all of your talk page comments on this page appear to be AI-generated (without proper disclosure) and your content additions to the article are promotionally toned. I have restored the Special:Permalink/1290141533 version of the article prior to your content additions. Currently, the consensus on this talk page is against your content additions, so please do not reinstate them. — Newslinger talk 08:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Update – 22 May 2025

Thanks for the feedback and for taking the time to engage. I hear the concerns around tone and the perception of AI-generated content. That definitely wasn’t my intention — my goal was simply to help expand the article using well-sourced, factual information. I’ll take another look at the “Business Growth and Expansion” section and revise it with a more neutral tone and closer alignment to Wikipedia’s content policies. If anyone has suggestions or would like to collaborate on a better version, I’d really welcome the input.

LLM disclosure:

I used a language model (ChatGPT) to assist with drafting and structuring some of the text, but I personally reviewed, fact-checked, and edited all contributions to ensure accuracy, proper sourcing, and adherence to tone guidelines. I’m happy to continue refining the content based on community feedback.

— [[User:Calmsea123456]] Calmsea123456 (talk) 09:51, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I would be interested to know your personal reasons for focusing edits almost exclusively on this page. As always we assume good faith, but the specific focus and nature of edits raises concerns given the nature of the individuals previous actions. 2A00:23C7:CB03:7F01:11FD:D918:AA49:E2D0 (talk) 00:47, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate your question. I’m contributing to this page because I noticed it was quite short and didn’t reflect the depth of public information available from reliable sources. While I do admire the work of the subjects, I’m doing my best to follow Wikipedia’s guidelines — especially NPOV and reliable sourcing — and am open to any feedback that improves the article.

— User:Calmsea123456 Calmsea123456 (talk) 11:39, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Update – 17 June 2025

Following earlier feedback, I’ve rewritten the “Career Beginnings” section in my sandbox with a more neutral tone and clearer focus on reliably sourced content:

➡️ User:Calmsea123456/sandbox

This version avoids promotional language and follows BLP and NPOV guidelines closely. All references are from high-quality publications (e.g. Irish Times, Irish Examiner).

I’d really appreciate any feedback before proposing it be added to the main article again. Open to collaboration and edits from others. Thanks for your time!

— User:Calmsea123456 Calmsea123456 (talk) 11:41, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Calmsea123456, your continued posting of obviously LLM-generated comments on this talk page is disruptive. Per the WP:AITALK guideline, LLM-generated comments can be collapsed. Consequently, LLM-generated comments do not count toward consensus. Please explain your views and write your edits in your own words. — Newslinger talk 21:14, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, @Newslinger. I really hear your concern. While I did get help drafting parts of my sandbox version, I’ve personally fact-checked and edited everything with complete care to follow Wikipedia’s sourcing and neutrality standards.

Going forward, I’ll do my best to write in a more natural tone. I genuinely want to improve the article using reliable sources, and I welcome input or collaboration from others. Thanks Calmsea123456 (talk) 09:27, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Request for feedback or input on draft 'Career beginings' section

Hi :)

I’ve worked on a new version of the “Career Beginnings” section and would really appreciate any thoughts or feedback. I’ve tried to keep the tone neutral, cite good sources like The Irish Times and Irish Examiner, and avoid anything that sounds promotional. You can see it in my sandbox here:

link here User:Calmsea123456/sandbox

If anyone has time to review or suggest changes before I propose adding it to the article, that’d be great. Thanks! Calmsea123456 (talk) 09:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

quick update to say that I added this section as there was no comments or objections for more than 7 days. All references are from high-quality publications and follow BLP/NPOV. Thanks :) Calmsea123456 (talk) 10:04, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Proposal to add paragraph 1 of 'Business Growth and Expansion' Section

Hi :) I’d like to propose reintroducing a trimmed-down and neutral version of the previously removed “Business Growth and Expansion” section.

I've split it into smaller parts and begun with a short, factual paragraph summarising the café and product expansion, based entirely on reliable, third-party sources.

You can view the draft for Part 1 in my sandbox here: User:Calmsea123456/sandbox#Business_Growth_and_Expansion

If there's no objection in the coming days, I’d like to begin integrating this section to help reflect well-sourced public developments in the Flynn brothers’ business.

Im happy to to adjust based on feedback and to collaborate. Thanks a million! Calmsea123456 (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Proposal to add paragraph 2 of 'Business Growth and Expansion' section

Hi all,

I’m proposing to add a second short, neutrally worded and independently sourced paragraph under the “Business Growth and Expansion” section. It briefly covers the Flynn brothers joining Jamie Oliver’s Food Tube in 2015 and the opening of a fully plant-based Happy Pear café in Dublin Airport in 2019.

You can preview the proposed text in my sandbox here:

👉 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Calmsea123456/sandbox

If there are no objections within 7 days, I plan to add it to the article.

Thanks in advance for any feedback!

All the best,

Calmsea123456 Calmsea123456 (talk) 15:30, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi again :) I’m proposing to add a third short, independently sourced paragraph under “Business Growth and Expansion,” covering the regenerative organic farm and the 2023 crowdfunding campaign. You can preview it in my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Calmsea123456/sandbox

As before, if there are no objections in the next 7 days, I’ll plan to add it to the main article.

Thanks a mill, all the best Calmsea123456 (talk) 14:24, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

New section: Books and Media Appearances – Wave 1

Hi all :)

I’m proposing to begin the “Books and Media Appearances” section in small, sourced steps.

To start, I’ve added a single, neutral sentence about the first cookbook (The Happy Pear: Recipes and Stories from the First Ten Years, 2014) and its Irish nonfiction bestseller status, supported by citations from The Irish Times and Irish Independent.

Proposed text:

In 2014, David and Stephen Flynn published their first cookbook, The Happy Pear: Recipes and Stories from the First Ten Years, which reached number one on the Irish nonfiction bestseller list.Siggins, Lise Hand (20 May 2016). "The unstoppable ascent of The Happy Pear". The Irish Times. Retrieved 11 August 2025."The Happy Pear brothers bring healthy eating to the masses". Irish Independent. 23 July 2014. Retrieved 11 August 2025.

I’ll wait the usual 7 days for feedback before adding this to the live page.

Thanks very much. Calmsea123456 (talk) 10:30, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I object as is. this is more WP:PROMO Bluethricecreamman (talk) 11:57, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

I came from WP:NPOV/N and yeah, this is WP:PROMO. Simonm223 (talk) 16:51, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

WP:PROMO

We really aren’t an advertising firm and information about the range of products the brothers sell and books they publish is most certainly not encyclopedia worthy.

I’ve gone ahead and reverted the info. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 11:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback. I understand the concern about WP:PROMO. To keep it strictly factual, how about starting smaller with just:

In 2014, David and Stephen Flynn published their first cookbook, The Happy Pear: Recipes and Stories from the First Ten Years.

Thanks Calmsea123456 (talk) 12:10, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Is there a critical review or some WP:Secondary sourcing that indicates WP:DUE? Bluethricecreamman (talk) 12:13, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

RFC: Adding a short “Business Growth and Expansion” paragraph

Hi, I’d like community input on whether a short paragraph about the business activities of David and Stephen Flynn should be added. The current article gives space to controversies but does not mention well-sourced coverage about their business growth. Reliable sources such as The Irish Times and Irish Independent have reported on milestones like their work with Jamie Oliver and the opening of a café at Dublin Airport.

Proposed text: In 2015, the Flynn brothers were invited to join Jamie Oliver’s Food Tube network to promote plant-based eating."Identical Irish twin brothers get set to join Jamie Oliver". Irish Independent. 29 January 2015. In 2019, they opened a fully plant-based Happy Pear café in Dublin Airport’s Terminal 1, the first of its kind at the airport."The Happy Pear Opens Dublin Airport's First Plant-Based Café". Dublin Airport. 9 September 2019.

Question: Should this be included under “Business Growth and Expansion”?

Calmsea123456 (talk) 12:14, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

No. Also please read WP:RFC and WP:RFCBEFORE and talk to folks at WP:NPOVN Bluethricecreamman (talk) 14:48, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I’m hoping to hear from a range of editors to establish consensus. The sources provided are high-quality (Irish Independent and Dublin Airport), and I’d welcome any further views on whether this short paragraph could be included for balance. Calmsea123456 (talk) 12:35, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I wouldn't include it. If you go anywhere with a lot of people, you'll find "celebrity" restaurants like this. This is promotional, slow news day overage, especially when the sources are the airport's site (essentially a primary source) and the Irish Independent (essentially a local paper). When or if multiple sources from across the world report on, say, how famous the restaurant has become, then I'd consider a mention. Woodroar (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

No, it should not be included. I agree with the comments of both of the other editors above. GeneralBelly (talk) 22:57, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

New section: Books and Media Appearances – Wave 1

Hi all,

I’d like to start a “Books and Media Appearances” section in small steps.

For Wave 1, I’ve drafted a single sentence about the Flynn brothers’ first cookbook (2014) and its position on the Irish nonfiction bestseller list, supported by coverage from the Irish Independent and The Irish Times.

Proposed text:

In 2014, David and Stephen Flynn published their first cookbook, The Happy Pear: Recipes and Stories from the First Ten Years, which reached number one on the Irish nonfiction bestseller list.{{cite news |title=The Happy Pear brothers bring healthy eating to the masses |url=https://www.independent.ie/life/food-drink/the-happy-pear-brothers-bring-healthy-eating-to-the-masses/30456847.html |work=Irish Independent |date=23 July 2014}}{{cite news |last=Hand |first=Lise |title=The unstoppable ascent of The Happy Pear |url=https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/the-unstoppable-ascent-of-the-happy-pear-1.2652342 |work=The Irish Times |date=20 May 2016}}

Full draft is also in my sandbox here: [[User:Calmsea123456/sandbox]].

I’ll wait around a week for feedback before adding it to the live article.

Thanks! Calmsea123456 (talk) 12:50, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Also no. WP:PROMO again, this is an encyclopedia page not an advertisement or resume for the flynns Bluethricecreamman (talk) 12:55, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Minor thing

@GeneralBelly On , IMO there is no need to have "In a statement to the Irish Independent," in-text, the cite is enough, if we didn't have a decent source what the spokesperson said wouldn't be included. Also I think the shorter quote is sufficient, but that is more a personal taste, if other editors have an opinion on that they'll say so. I shortened it since the David_and_Stephen_Flynn#Medical_misinformation is the biggest section in the article, and my knee-jerk reaction is that this probably fails WP:NPOV a bit. But I just noticed this article, and I haven't tried to assess the general WP:RS on the article subject. At a glance the sources in the section looks ok, but WP:PROPORTION is thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:10, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Good morning, yes re: Irish Independent, that was for context for the casual reader - a statement to a national paper is noteworthy and gives the Flynns credit for taking the issue seriously, versus something like an Instagram post which can seem more ephemeral or informal. Re: the quote, I think it's important to include Zach Bush as his appearance on the podcast was the core of the issue. If we edit that part out it becomes more NPOV as it could look like the Flynns were the ones who said the controversial things when in fact it was Bush and they were mainly criticised for not challenging him. Re: the vaccine comment, I think it's relevant for a few reasons: their whole business is built on healthy living and vaccination is a public health matter; they had Bush on the podcast and he is a Covid denier; it shows their change in approach from commenting on medical matters to refusing to comment, demonstrating the effects of the issues they had around the misinformation controversies. If anything, it is less NPOV as it shows Flynn following through on their commitment to steer clear of medical matters, as mentioned earlier in the article. We have to be careful not to over-correct and minimise to the point it becomes a promo.--GeneralBelly (talk) 09:11, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

My reading is that since the next sentence is "In the show, their guest Zach Bush had made incorrect claims about the effects of antibiotics on mental health." he doesn't have to be named twice in the same paragraph. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:18, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

I have tidied that up a bit now. GeneralBelly (talk) 09:23, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Proposed addition per DRN request (Exact Text for Review)

@Bluethricecreamman:

Hi all — following the DRN thread, I’m posting the exact text I’d like to propose for inclusion in the article, as requested by the moderator. I’m very open to adjusting tone or wording if needed for neutrality.

• • Proposed wording:**

“In 2015, the Flynn brothers joined Jamie Oliver’s Food Tube network to promote plant-based cooking.” "Identical Irish twin brothers get set to join Jamie Oliver". Irish Independent. 23 July 2014.

“In 2019, they opened a fully plant-based Happy Pear café in Dublin Airport’s Terminal 1, the first of its kind at the airport.” "The Happy Pear Opens Dublin Airport's First Plant-Based Café". Dublin Airport. 9 September 2019.

These are both straightforward milestones that are covered in reliable sources. Happy to discuss or refine as needed. Calmsea123456 (talk) 12:46, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

That seems less promotional to me, i feel we could include this type of wording correctly in thw article. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 18:24, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

I’ve now added the two milestone sentences (Food Tube appearance and the Dublin Airport café opening) to the article using the wording agreed above. This is per the DRN request and the positive feedback here.

If anyone feels further tweaks are needed for tone, placement, or sourcing, I’m very happy to adjust. Thanks again for the input and help improving the article. Calmsea123456 (talk) 17:23, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Proposed New Section: Books and Media – Wave 1

Hi all — following on from the previous successful DRN-requested additions, I’d like to propose the first part of a new “Books and Media” section. This paragraph summarises the Flynn brothers’ published cookbooks using neutral, reliably sourced coverage.

Proposed wording:

In 2014 the Flynn brothers published their first cookbook, The Happy Pear: Recipes and Stories from the First Ten Years, which reached number one on the Irish nonfiction bestseller list. They have since authored several further cookbooks, with multiple titles appearing in national bestseller charts.

I'm happy to adjust wording for tone, placement, or neutrality. If there are no objections after a few days and at least one editor supports this, I will proceed with adding it to the article.

Calmsea123456 (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2025 (UTC) Calmsea123456 (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

both of those cited pieces seem very promotional. I think Irish times does sponsored content?

we already include a books section that lists it appropriate, we should list it there if necessary. i object to anything more. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 02:12, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

it appears the first source is an interview from the authors, where the authors have a literal byline. the second includes actual recipes, which gives the impression of sponsored content. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 02:13, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback - I appreciate you taking the time to look at this.

On the sources: both of the Irish Times pieces are standard editorial articles rather than sponsored content, but I understand the concern about interviews and recipe-led coverage giving that impression. I’m very happy to switch to alternative secondary coverage if that helps address neutrality concerns.

On placement: I’m also happy for this material to sit within the existing “Books” section rather than creating a new subsection.

As a compromise, would you be open to a single, very minimal sentence in the existing Books section - supported by a non–Irish Times source - simply noting the publication of the first cookbook and its reception? For example:

Their first cookbook, The Happy Pear: Recipes and Stories from the First Ten Years (2014), became a national bestseller in Ireland.

I’m very open to adjusting wording, scope, or sourcing to find something that works. Calmsea123456 (talk) 12:21, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Section balance and proportionality (UNDUE)

Hi all, I’d like to raise a structural question rather than propose new content. At present, the article contains a standalone “Medical misinformation” section that is proportionally large relative to coverage of the subjects’ 20+ year careers in publishing, media, business, and community work. Per WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP, would editors support rebalancing structure so that criticism is contextualised within a broader “Public reception and criticism” section, rather than standing alone, once minimal career sections exist? I am not proposing removal of sourced criticism, only proportional framing consistent with Wikipedia practice on comparable biographies. Thanks for any input. Calmsea123456 (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

No, I would not support changing the structure in that way. The article is not, and should not become, an advert for the brothers or their businesses. There was significant, repeated controversy, widely covered in reliable media, and directly connected to their commercial activities. In that context, a clearly defined section on this issue is not only warranted but necessary to avoid the page drifting into promotional territory. The current standalone section reflects the weight and relevance of the issue in sources and already aligns with WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP, presenting well-sourced criticism clearly and proportionately.--GeneralBelly (talk) 01:57, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

agree it shouldn't be an advert. i do think calmsea has a point. WP:CSECTION argues against such a section, but the claim that the criticism is not a majorly due is entirely wrong.
if anything, their suspect medical misinfo may be more due than much of the promo User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 02:38, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Note: I’ve requested a WP:Third Opinion on the structural UNDUE question above to seek input from an uninvolved editor. Calmsea123456 (talk) 12:03, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

so, in previous disputes, you've asked for input on WP:NPOVN but when the result was not to your liking, you went to WP:DRN.
and then you ghosted WP:DRN right when the mediators starts the process, which ends the process before it even began.
and now we are going to WP:3O?

in addition, its fairly obvious there is some kind of WP:COI happening here. Wikipedia:IDIDNTHEARTHAT definitely is happening here. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 14:26, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, this is repeated behaviour over a period of time. It looks like a pattern of forum shopping from a single-purpose account. I see that the inappropriate Wikipedia:Third opinion has been rejected.GeneralBelly (talk) 01:00, 29 January 2026 (UTC)