Jump to content

Talk:Gareth Evans (politician): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m question raised
No edit summary
Line 19: Line 19:


The second and third paragraph of the 1990-1998 section are highly non-neutral in tone ("astonishingly naive", "replete with champagne") and unsatisfactorily referenced (especially the Soares and John Pilger citations). This bit really needs cleanup. [[User:Oscillon|Oscillon]] ([[User talk:Oscillon|talk]]) 07:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
The second and third paragraph of the 1990-1998 section are highly non-neutral in tone ("astonishingly naive", "replete with champagne") and unsatisfactorily referenced (especially the Soares and John Pilger citations). This bit really needs cleanup. [[User:Oscillon|Oscillon]] ([[User talk:Oscillon|talk]]) 07:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

== Add a Criticism Section ==

I for one am very fond of R2P and other Evansian innovations, but it is probably best to simply add the Pilger-type criticisms to one section that gives the piece a bit of balance, as it stands now, it is too hagiographic. There is not need to either accept or deny the veracity of the Pilger criticisms, but rather what is needed is mentioning them as part of the POV of Evans' critics.



== Evans and apologia for Indonesian military violence ==
== Evans and apologia for Indonesian military violence ==

Revision as of 00:14, 26 February 2016


Reasons for Non-Neutral Point of View tag

The second and third paragraph of the 1990-1998 section are highly non-neutral in tone ("astonishingly naive", "replete with champagne") and unsatisfactorily referenced (especially the Soares and John Pilger citations). This bit really needs cleanup. Oscillon (talk) 07:25, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add a Criticism Section

I for one am very fond of R2P and other Evansian innovations, but it is probably best to simply add the Pilger-type criticisms to one section that gives the piece a bit of balance, as it stands now, it is too hagiographic. There is not need to either accept or deny the veracity of the Pilger criticisms, but rather what is needed is mentioning them as part of the POV of Evans' critics.


Evans and apologia for Indonesian military violence

The contribution here about Evans's tolerance, etc, of the Santa Cruz massacre and other events, is, imho, quite important stuff. However, it lacks the citations which we consider essential for potentially damaging content about a living person. I've deleted some of the most arbitrary and irrelevant matter and tagged other statements for citations. (Some of them are common knowledge, but still require verification to be included in Wikipedia.) Incidentally, I was chagrined to find citations in the Santa Cruz massacre article which can't be followed up because they give only an author's name and page number--no title!! So I've started a discussion on that, too. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 09:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following was sent to my talk page but probably belongs here. I am not interested in promoting anyone's career, Evans included, and of course Wikepedia is not an appropriate vehicle for such purposes. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 14:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please Excuse me if this is not the place to talk about Gareth Evans. I have just concluded referencing a number of needs citation on this page to do with Evans' involvement with East Timor and Indonesia. Please don't delete the item on Evan's failed attempt at the Secretary General's position until you have read the speech by John Pilger, I have cited. Please, please help us. Having known Gareth Evans (since 1986) as I do he may just make another run at a later time. This information which is already on the public record may make a difference. 219.133.65.222 (talk) 05:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC) Dilidoug

Kernot/Democrats episode

The article states that the relationship with Kernot was not known until five years after Kernot's defection to the ALP -- I'm certain that this was reported widely in the news at the time... Anyone like to check this? You, Me and Everyone Else (talk) 07:34, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bill Clinton and Gareth Evans.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Bill Clinton and Gareth Evans.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

centre-right vs centrist?

I noticed this revision changed "centre-right" to "centrist". Is this an accurate thing to do? Revision as of 21:45, 2 April 2014 49.188.23.3 Tullyis (talk) 10:49, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]