![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"The Lindsay Affair"? Where on earth does this name come from? mge kelly 13:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I suggest the name of the article be altered to [soapboxing removed Andjam ( talk) 23:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)] Pauline4eva ( talk) 17:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I have added that alternative title to the article per the above -- 121.209.160.51 ( talk) 20:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I have linked to the Lateline page that WILL have the Ruddock interview where he admits that he does not know which 3 Liberal Members were expelled. The ABC has not put the Transcript up as of this morning - but it should be there in a few hours so please if you are checking this link wait a few hours before editing. Thanks -- 121.209.160.51 ( talk) 20:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Googling for "The Lindsay Affair" also reveals a controversy to do with someone called John Lindsay. I think something like "Islamic Australia Federation hoax" might be better. Andjam ( talk) 23:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I object to the use of the word "hoax" in the title. From the
hoax article:
I think calling it a "hoax" is to side with Jackie Kelly's claim that this attempt to deceive voters about her (successor's) opponent was merely a joke. Perhaps "fraud" or "deception" would be better words to use in the title. -- Imroy ( talk) 03:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, definitely not a hoax. Has to be either Lindsay pamphlet scandal or (if you like long titles) 2007 Australian Federal Election pamphlet scandal. Nick 04:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I prefer 2007 Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Timeshift ( talk) 04:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi could people please use the citation templates, eg
<ref>{{cite news |first= |last= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title= |url= |work= |publisher= |date= |accessdate= }} </ref>
thanks-- Matilda formerly known as User:Golden Wattle talk 23:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
In Hilaly's wikipedia article, it says "sometimes alternatively spelled Tajeddin Hilaly, Hilali, Al-Hilaly, Taj el-Din al-Hilali, Aldin Alhilali, Tajideen El-Hilaly or Tajeddine". Yet this article says "(misspelled as "Al-Hilaly")". Just because they got very creative with "Ala akba" doesn't mean they got Hilaly's name wrong. (Sometimes I'm frusted at having to search both Hilaly and Hilali in google news, BTW) Andjam ( talk) 04:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I added a list of claims from the pamphlet, but how true or untrue are they? I know the "bali bomber supporters" claim is just verbatim Liberal Party semantic scaremongering after McClelland's speech. But what about the building of mosques and the support of Sheik Taj? The mosque thing could just be fear-mongering (see the Chaser sketch about a proposed mosque being built in Mosman). And I'm not sure how a party would support or oppose the entry a Grand Mufti into the country. Did the libs or anyone else oppose? I don't see why a political party would be involed and bet they had nothing to do with it. The Paul Keating/ASIO claim is more specific though. Any source on that? -- Imroy ( talk) 05:13, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I just added more of a description of the flags, photos, and logos used in the pamphlet. I wonder if anyone can help me figure out two issues:
Anyone? -- Imroy ( talk) 07:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I thought the flyer is blue, or are some in black and white? F ( talk) 22:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with this revert. Thoughts people? Timeshift ( talk) 04:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Surely merge this with the Australian election article It is not worthy of its own article on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.184.43 ( talk) 04:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
"2007 Australian Federal Election pamphlet scandal" is a little boring. I'd suggest Islamic Australia Federation pamphlet scandal, but that's verging a little too close to wikiality. Any alternatives? Andjam ( talk) 05:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
2007 pamphlet scandal? Which one (possibly)? Andjam ( talk) 06:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Is there a bit of to-and-fro about whether the pamphlet had authorisation? [3] has "and no Liberal Party authorisation" (which doesn't mean no authorisation), and Jeff Eagan has the somewhat double-edged statement that "I categorically deny distributing any material that was not authorised in accordance with the Electoral Act,". Andjam ( talk) 01:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
The text currently says "a flyer linking Folley's party with an extremist Islamic organisation". If the IAF endorsing the ALP indicates a "link", would this mean that Rudd is linked to Hilaly because the latter endorsed Rudd? Or are there differences (such as use of the ALP logo)? (Then again, I questioned whether opposing the execution of Bali bombers is the same as supporting terrorists, and got proved wrong) Andjam ( talk) 01:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
There are italics being used for
I can sense the exasperation, but is it suitable for an encyclopedia to express exasperation? Andjam ( talk) 03:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I think the intro could cut to the chase quicker. I want to know in the first sentence what happened (ie, fake pamphlets were distributed), followed by who did it. Then a summary of the consequences. I don't want to know that "Jackie Kelly was forced to deny..." before knowing what the incident was. Thanks, Lester 02:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Read the very top of this page, there is a link. 'Lindsay pamphlet scandal' is not some ad-hoc made-up title by wikipedians. Timeshift ( talk) 10:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Anyone know what's happening with this? Timeshift ( talk) 02:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Article one - Article two - anyone want to add to the article? Timeshift ( talk) 02:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
"The scandal disrupted the election campaign of Prime Minister John Howard."
Is this meant to suggest that it disrupted Howard's attempt to remain the member for Bennelong, the Coalition's attempt to retain a majority in the House of Representatives, or something else? Andjam ( talk) 11:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/24/2197310.htm Timeshift ( talk) 01:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I see Chijoff has now earned himself a criminal record (conviction).( http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/chijoff-fined-over-extremist-scare/2008/05/07/1210131046871.html SMH) Lester 07:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Jackie Kelly's husband guilty of fake leaflets 29/4/2009 - I thought this was long over? Are there parts in between that we haven't documented in this article? Timeshift ( talk) 08:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:41, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:58, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://news.smh.com.au/leaflet-charge-dismissed-against-man/20080429-299q.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:11, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"The Lindsay Affair"? Where on earth does this name come from? mge kelly 13:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I suggest the name of the article be altered to [soapboxing removed Andjam ( talk) 23:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)] Pauline4eva ( talk) 17:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I have added that alternative title to the article per the above -- 121.209.160.51 ( talk) 20:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I have linked to the Lateline page that WILL have the Ruddock interview where he admits that he does not know which 3 Liberal Members were expelled. The ABC has not put the Transcript up as of this morning - but it should be there in a few hours so please if you are checking this link wait a few hours before editing. Thanks -- 121.209.160.51 ( talk) 20:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Googling for "The Lindsay Affair" also reveals a controversy to do with someone called John Lindsay. I think something like "Islamic Australia Federation hoax" might be better. Andjam ( talk) 23:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I object to the use of the word "hoax" in the title. From the
hoax article:
I think calling it a "hoax" is to side with Jackie Kelly's claim that this attempt to deceive voters about her (successor's) opponent was merely a joke. Perhaps "fraud" or "deception" would be better words to use in the title. -- Imroy ( talk) 03:51, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, definitely not a hoax. Has to be either Lindsay pamphlet scandal or (if you like long titles) 2007 Australian Federal Election pamphlet scandal. Nick 04:36, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I prefer 2007 Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Timeshift ( talk) 04:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi could people please use the citation templates, eg
<ref>{{cite news |first= |last= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title= |url= |work= |publisher= |date= |accessdate= }} </ref>
thanks-- Matilda formerly known as User:Golden Wattle talk 23:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
In Hilaly's wikipedia article, it says "sometimes alternatively spelled Tajeddin Hilaly, Hilali, Al-Hilaly, Taj el-Din al-Hilali, Aldin Alhilali, Tajideen El-Hilaly or Tajeddine". Yet this article says "(misspelled as "Al-Hilaly")". Just because they got very creative with "Ala akba" doesn't mean they got Hilaly's name wrong. (Sometimes I'm frusted at having to search both Hilaly and Hilali in google news, BTW) Andjam ( talk) 04:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I added a list of claims from the pamphlet, but how true or untrue are they? I know the "bali bomber supporters" claim is just verbatim Liberal Party semantic scaremongering after McClelland's speech. But what about the building of mosques and the support of Sheik Taj? The mosque thing could just be fear-mongering (see the Chaser sketch about a proposed mosque being built in Mosman). And I'm not sure how a party would support or oppose the entry a Grand Mufti into the country. Did the libs or anyone else oppose? I don't see why a political party would be involed and bet they had nothing to do with it. The Paul Keating/ASIO claim is more specific though. Any source on that? -- Imroy ( talk) 05:13, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I just added more of a description of the flags, photos, and logos used in the pamphlet. I wonder if anyone can help me figure out two issues:
Anyone? -- Imroy ( talk) 07:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I thought the flyer is blue, or are some in black and white? F ( talk) 22:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with this revert. Thoughts people? Timeshift ( talk) 04:00, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Surely merge this with the Australian election article It is not worthy of its own article on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.184.43 ( talk) 04:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
"2007 Australian Federal Election pamphlet scandal" is a little boring. I'd suggest Islamic Australia Federation pamphlet scandal, but that's verging a little too close to wikiality. Any alternatives? Andjam ( talk) 05:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
2007 pamphlet scandal? Which one (possibly)? Andjam ( talk) 06:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Is there a bit of to-and-fro about whether the pamphlet had authorisation? [3] has "and no Liberal Party authorisation" (which doesn't mean no authorisation), and Jeff Eagan has the somewhat double-edged statement that "I categorically deny distributing any material that was not authorised in accordance with the Electoral Act,". Andjam ( talk) 01:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
The text currently says "a flyer linking Folley's party with an extremist Islamic organisation". If the IAF endorsing the ALP indicates a "link", would this mean that Rudd is linked to Hilaly because the latter endorsed Rudd? Or are there differences (such as use of the ALP logo)? (Then again, I questioned whether opposing the execution of Bali bombers is the same as supporting terrorists, and got proved wrong) Andjam ( talk) 01:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
There are italics being used for
I can sense the exasperation, but is it suitable for an encyclopedia to express exasperation? Andjam ( talk) 03:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I think the intro could cut to the chase quicker. I want to know in the first sentence what happened (ie, fake pamphlets were distributed), followed by who did it. Then a summary of the consequences. I don't want to know that "Jackie Kelly was forced to deny..." before knowing what the incident was. Thanks, Lester 02:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Read the very top of this page, there is a link. 'Lindsay pamphlet scandal' is not some ad-hoc made-up title by wikipedians. Timeshift ( talk) 10:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Anyone know what's happening with this? Timeshift ( talk) 02:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Article one - Article two - anyone want to add to the article? Timeshift ( talk) 02:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
"The scandal disrupted the election campaign of Prime Minister John Howard."
Is this meant to suggest that it disrupted Howard's attempt to remain the member for Bennelong, the Coalition's attempt to retain a majority in the House of Representatives, or something else? Andjam ( talk) 11:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/24/2197310.htm Timeshift ( talk) 01:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
I see Chijoff has now earned himself a criminal record (conviction).( http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/chijoff-fined-over-extremist-scare/2008/05/07/1210131046871.html SMH) Lester 07:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Jackie Kelly's husband guilty of fake leaflets 29/4/2009 - I thought this was long over? Are there parts in between that we haven't documented in this article? Timeshift ( talk) 08:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:41, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:58, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lindsay pamphlet scandal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://news.smh.com.au/leaflet-charge-dismissed-against-man/20080429-299q.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:11, 23 December 2017 (UTC)