This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of Matthew Guy be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Tony Madafferi has been accused of murder Guy went to a dinner with him?
Ryan Smith backed Matthew Guy -- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 03:50, 20 August 2018 (UTC)10.22.50.32-- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 03:50, 20 August 2018 (UTC) [ [1]] Ryan Smith as the source states pledged support for Guy rather that he indicated that Guy was honest about what happened regarding the Lobster Cave diner. Upper house MP George Croznier supported Guy like Ryan Smith did.-- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 08:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)110.22.50.32--~~
Basically what I wanted to add was that Smith backed Guy is that okay or not?-- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 08:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)110.22.50.32--~~
[ [2]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 10:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Peter Reith should be refer to as the former deputy Liberal leader not as the former Howard Government Minister. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 12:59, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
The fact he is a former deputy leader takes precedence over a former minister. He should only be refer to as a former minister if it relates to the Howard Government which he was a minister of or a matter that relates to portfolio(s) that he held like him being the former Defence Minister in reference to the Children Overboard affair.
In general he should be refer to as the former deputy leader because that he is highest position he has achieved in his party.
Being a former minister does not make him anymore distinguishable to other former ministers and Reith has not been one since 2001.
Anyone can be a minister but not everyone can be leader or deputy leader of the party.
Being in a leadership position is more noticeable in history than being a minister as ministers are more dime in a dozen than a leader or a deputy leader. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 00:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't think it is matter that Reith is better known as a minister. It just simply shows that journalists don't have memories that stretch as far back to when he was deputy leader and Wikipedia is not meant as a journalistic avenue.
It is an encyclopedia and an encyclopedia is a reflection of history and as I said a deputy leader is more noticeable in history than a minister. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 00:56, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't know what the general consensus journalists has towards Wikipedia I however do know that the ABC does not take any credence from what it says in Wikipedia.
Wikipedia does not really owe journalists any favours. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 01:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I have edited to that very fact. 49.3.72.79 ( talk) 14:34, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
In background
Guy has said he was not ashamed to say he is a Christian.[4]
This is unnecessary, and reads as a political statement rather than a biographical statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.232.27 ( talk) 09:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 12:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Dag nabbit. Where will we find a new one? iamthinking2202 (please ping on reply if you would be so kind) 22:18, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
racist tough on crime Dog-whistle politics in parts of Melbourne, described as "brutal" and "dehumanising" by the African diaspora whom Guy targeted during the campaign. [1] [2]
I don't think the above is suitably NPOV for a BLP. The first source is no where near to being RS, and the second source, though stronger, fails verification for the most claims made. It does cite criticism from activists that called these policies dog whistle, but that's not enough for us to do so in wikivoice. Unbh ( talk) 12:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
@ Ecangola, @ Macktheknifeau, & @anyone_else_who_is_interested: I have removed this section as I believe that it does not adhere to WP:NPOV standards. I say this as, firstly, the section entirely places undue weight on the negative portions of his campaign, isn't balanced, and isn't written in a neutral tone. Secondly, I feel as though that the section places too much weight on news that a) doesn't have much connection to Matthew Guy, and b) doesn't have much connection to Matthew Guy's 2022 election campaign. Lastly, the section doesn't have much encyclopaedic value, I would describe it as trivial information that didn't survival the 24HR news cycle. - GA Melbourne ( talk) 13:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
undue weightAt least the first paragraph is due; the Guardian article used is specifically about Guy.
isn't written in a neutral toneThat would be solved by rephrasing.
trivial information that didn't survival the 24HR news cycleThat's very doubtful considering international press covered the incidents. Robby.is.on ( talk) 23:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph of Matthew Guy be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Tony Madafferi has been accused of murder Guy went to a dinner with him?
Ryan Smith backed Matthew Guy -- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 03:50, 20 August 2018 (UTC)10.22.50.32-- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 03:50, 20 August 2018 (UTC) [ [1]] Ryan Smith as the source states pledged support for Guy rather that he indicated that Guy was honest about what happened regarding the Lobster Cave diner. Upper house MP George Croznier supported Guy like Ryan Smith did.-- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 08:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)110.22.50.32--~~
Basically what I wanted to add was that Smith backed Guy is that okay or not?-- 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 08:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)110.22.50.32--~~
[ [2]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.22.50.32 ( talk) 10:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Peter Reith should be refer to as the former deputy Liberal leader not as the former Howard Government Minister. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 12:59, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
The fact he is a former deputy leader takes precedence over a former minister. He should only be refer to as a former minister if it relates to the Howard Government which he was a minister of or a matter that relates to portfolio(s) that he held like him being the former Defence Minister in reference to the Children Overboard affair.
In general he should be refer to as the former deputy leader because that he is highest position he has achieved in his party.
Being a former minister does not make him anymore distinguishable to other former ministers and Reith has not been one since 2001.
Anyone can be a minister but not everyone can be leader or deputy leader of the party.
Being in a leadership position is more noticeable in history than being a minister as ministers are more dime in a dozen than a leader or a deputy leader. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 00:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't think it is matter that Reith is better known as a minister. It just simply shows that journalists don't have memories that stretch as far back to when he was deputy leader and Wikipedia is not meant as a journalistic avenue.
It is an encyclopedia and an encyclopedia is a reflection of history and as I said a deputy leader is more noticeable in history than a minister. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 00:56, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I don't know what the general consensus journalists has towards Wikipedia I however do know that the ABC does not take any credence from what it says in Wikipedia.
Wikipedia does not really owe journalists any favours. 122.106.83.10 ( talk) 01:06, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I have edited to that very fact. 49.3.72.79 ( talk) 14:34, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
In background
Guy has said he was not ashamed to say he is a Christian.[4]
This is unnecessary, and reads as a political statement rather than a biographical statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.232.27 ( talk) 09:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 12:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Dag nabbit. Where will we find a new one? iamthinking2202 (please ping on reply if you would be so kind) 22:18, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
racist tough on crime Dog-whistle politics in parts of Melbourne, described as "brutal" and "dehumanising" by the African diaspora whom Guy targeted during the campaign. [1] [2]
I don't think the above is suitably NPOV for a BLP. The first source is no where near to being RS, and the second source, though stronger, fails verification for the most claims made. It does cite criticism from activists that called these policies dog whistle, but that's not enough for us to do so in wikivoice. Unbh ( talk) 12:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
@ Ecangola, @ Macktheknifeau, & @anyone_else_who_is_interested: I have removed this section as I believe that it does not adhere to WP:NPOV standards. I say this as, firstly, the section entirely places undue weight on the negative portions of his campaign, isn't balanced, and isn't written in a neutral tone. Secondly, I feel as though that the section places too much weight on news that a) doesn't have much connection to Matthew Guy, and b) doesn't have much connection to Matthew Guy's 2022 election campaign. Lastly, the section doesn't have much encyclopaedic value, I would describe it as trivial information that didn't survival the 24HR news cycle. - GA Melbourne ( talk) 13:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
undue weightAt least the first paragraph is due; the Guardian article used is specifically about Guy.
isn't written in a neutral toneThat would be solved by rephrasing.
trivial information that didn't survival the 24HR news cycleThat's very doubtful considering international press covered the incidents. Robby.is.on ( talk) 23:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)