Talk:Margaret set

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Hi. Interesting piece, although I'm not sure the title of the article is correct. I haven't checked all the plethora of sources, but I have gone through about 20, and the "Margaret Set" is mentioned in only one of them. Which is the same # as the "Margaret Clan". None of the others talk about a group centered around the princess. Could you please tell me which 3 of the sources you've provided go in-depth about the Margeret Set? That would greatly help evaluating notability.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

I concur with you opinion. Furthermore, one of the brief mentions I found includes princess herself asserting that there was no such thing as the Margaret Set, but he princess has herself joined the company of friends of Sharman Douglas. While all the persons of this tabloid gossip are apparently deceased for at least 10 years, the subject IMHO is close enough to WP:BLP and controversial to expect (somewhat) better sources than the old and new tabloids. Викидим (talk) 00:59, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

I added references from biographies by Christopher Warwick and Nigel Dempster. There was also an extended piece in the book by Nicholas Courtney. The reference you mention, as "brief" was part of a longer passage, but there were few pages I was able to link directly to. The same applies to the Dempster biography. There are about four pages now linked in from that biography, but it still isn't the entire reference. For context, the princess may have asserted she joined the company of Sharman Douglas, but that didn't change the fact that the group discussed was known and reported as the Margaret set, (or make the claim about it being Sharman Douglas's group very accurate, either).

I have added in-depth sources, if some appear brief that is what is available to be linked to. There are others, such as the aforementioned Lord of the Isle (Nicholas Courtney) but these cannot be linked to at all. The topic is also frequently brought up in documentaries. I referenced older news articles (neither tabloid nor tabloid-esque) for accuracy and because newer sources often tend to over dramatise the subject as being more controversial than how it was portrayed and viewed in real time. Zigzagged (talk) 01:42, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

For the avoidance of doubt, I had no objections whatsoever to the article title and topic. My only concern was simple: if a 70-yeaqr-old topic is notable, it should have acquired coverage beyond tabloids. Warwick and Dempster certainly brought an aura of respectability (even though they tell us very little about the Set itself beyond the list of members). Викидим (talk) 04:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

The topic acquired coverage from a variety of sources. The Warwick book covers a little on set activities and their press coverage. (There's a chapter "The Margaret Set" in a book by Noel Botham covering similar ground, adding how they made frequenting nightclubs an acceptable pastime). The Dempster segment describes the main players and their significance, fringe members, their media presence and influence as a result of activities such as nightclubbing and staging plays. The Courtney book acknowledges the set name and media presence, discusses Colin Tennant's part in it, their activities, group dynamics and how these changed. Zigzagged (talk) 17:20, 13 July 2025 (UTC)