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.

This page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government 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 the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance). England Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Following edits by user @KJB2017: after initial cleanup by @C.Fred: and @Rathfelder::

Actions for you to take

• Please re-add information on local campaigns, in a neutral way, with more depth.
• Please find more non-primary sources to back up all tagged statements
• Please find sources to sources for the "Early life" section.

Do NOT edit this page if you have a conflict of interest.

Actions I've taken

Early life

• Added citation needed and BLP sources templates

Whilst normally unsourced information in BLPs would be deleted, as this is not potentially libelous or damaging I am willing to let users source it if they can. If not sourced soon, I will delete it.

Justice Select Committee

• Removed list of inquires
• Removed all external links
• Edited for clarity and conciseness
• Section header removed

There is no need to include list of all inquiries as not directly related to Chalk - more suited to Justice Select Committee Page. Made more concise and kept otherwise.

All party-parliamentary groups

• Deleted in entirety

Copyright violation, copied straight from source

Stalking

• Edited for clarity and conciseness
• Edited for neutrality
• Removed unnecessary quotes
• Section header removed

This is a relevant section, I am glad it was added. However, it was excessive and written like an advertisement.

EU

• Edited for clarity and conciseness
• Edited for tone
• Section header removed

Local Campaigns

• Deleted in entirety

Whilst a section entitled 'Local Campaigns' would be beneficial, at the time it contained only a list of campaigns and one primary source. Re-add when you have secondary sources and more than just a list of names.

Controversies

• Re-added section entitled 'Fraud Investigation'

This is a relevant section and written relatively neutrally. If you have an issue with the way it is written you may edit it, but do not delete it in its entirety.

Hope this helps and feel free to ask me for help or clarification. Legendiii 22:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC) (find me here).

I now believe that this article no longer requires the following template messages above the lead:

• ((BLP sources))
  • Reason: Now sufficiently covered by section template message ((BLP sources section))
• ((BLP primary sources))
  • Reason: Only applies to one source, sufficiently covered by inline tag

Any disagreement? Thanks, Legendiii (talk) 12:46, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Partly done: new additions since suggestion rely on primary sources, so ((BLP primary sources)) stays. Legendiii (talk) 13:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the ‘quick facts’ it states he has two children, but under ‘personal life’ it states that he has three! Nikrehg (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Large sections of this article reads like it always written by a parliamentary researcher/someone promoting the subject 146.198.237.181 (talk) 06:46, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since this concern about a potential COI was raised last year in July 2022, quite a lot of puffery, long quotes, excessive content, trivia etc has been removed from the article. I'm therefore tonight deleting the COI template on the article for the time being. But if any other editors have further concerns about a potential COI, then the template can be placed back into the article. The biography still does contain too many references to primary sources. More of this content with primary sources could be removed. Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 00:24, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As per my recent edits, I have removed quite a bit of unreferenced information and information that only had primary sources, normally from Hansard or Gov.uk. I am more than happy for people to reinstate the information, but only if they can find a secondary source to go alongside the primary source. This brings me on to another point. Going through the article, I found that there were many examples of what Chalk had done in Parliament, many more than other MPs, particularly MPs who were only elected in 2015. The cynic in me would say that this somewhat positive vibe towards Chalk is deliberate, but this is only an assumption. I am happy for feedback and comments on this. Ellwat (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]