Talk:Kim Carr/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Theusualsuspect persists in deleting references to Kim Carr's recruitment of Mohammad Abbouche, which itself was referenced to an article to The Age, an admittedly dubious source.

It would be appropriate to discuss it perhaps without deleting it and restoring it endlessly.

I submit that it is very relevant to an article about Carr's activities within the Labor Party. He is probably one of the most powerful people in the ALP and I think there should be a much lengthier treatment here. DarrenRay 08:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I am not against Carr's factional activities being reported, so long as they are relevant and sourced. The article and information that I have deleted is not directly related to Carr, but rather Steve Roach and Abbouche. Add more relevant, notable and encyclopedia information, or I will revert it.Theusualsuspect 09:20, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I have supplied a source that directly relates to Carr's activities in recruiting Abbouche. You are deleting it without justification. DarrenRay 11:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added Senator Carr's important delegation to Beijing and commentary from The Age about the Abbouche recruitment. May a thousand flowers bloom. DarrenRay 09:06, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Nice improvements, I would like to see more on Carr's housing policy announced last year where he denounced McMansions. As an inner city resident myself, I agree with his policies. --2006BC 10:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure you do, as do all the Age-readers and flatdwellers here in St Kilda. I doubt it went down as well in the outer suburbs where we actually need to win seats. Intelligent Mr Toad 11:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I propose a new system where inner city seats get twice the weighting of the ignorant outer suburban elements. This system worked well in Queensland for many a year. --2006BC 11:27, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

methinks you not know Queensland history as much as you think you do. Ambi 01:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it was the other way round, actually. Intelligent Mr Toad 11:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Photo

Looks like he is on a fishing trip. Isn't their anything more official. What about something with him in that vest he always wears. Xtra 06:05, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

He is actually standing outside a polling booth during the preselection vote in (I think) Maribyrnong. The problem is that official photos have been judged by the photonazis to be not PD, despite my obtaining written permission to use them here. I have a photo of him which I took inside Parliament House, but I have been told that use of such photos here could constitute a breach of privilege since I did not have anyone's permission to take them. Adam 06:43, 19 March 2006 (UTC) (no relation)

I agree the pic is not very official looking. Why can't the official pics be used? My ideal would be one of him on one of his two official and three unofficial trips to Syria. Me, I prefer Portsea or Broadbeach for my relaxation but each to their own. DarrenRay 06:54, 19 March 2006 (UTC) (no relation to any living Senator)

The official pictures can't be used because they're not free - we can only use them with permission, and the aim is to weed such images out and replace them with free images. Ambi 01:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

And free images of politicians of a standard suitable for use are very difficult to obtain. It is even more difficult for politicians, such as Bill McMahon for example, who are too recent to come under the 50 year rule but no longer around to be photographed. Adam 02:08, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Purging

Can we not purge Ben's hard work from this article? I found it quite interesting and hope it is incorporated, I don't like the long quotes as a stylistic thing so I'd favour a rewrite not a purge. DarrenRay 05:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

If you want the material kept, you rewrite it. It was patently biased (even if it is Kim Carr), and so deserved to be purged. I won't object, though, if you rework it into the rest of the article. Ambi 01:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Bias

I cannot see the bias Ambi speaks of. Please elaborate. Xtra 02:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Carr is mainly notable for being a factional warrior. He's not famous for comments about Syria or China, and to blow these up out of proportion into huge sections taking up most of the article is patently biased - not to mention pretty bad encyclopedic writing. They deserve to be mentioned, but in the format they were before, it looks like a poor attempt at grasping at straws to discredit the guy. However, being Carr, he does that just nicely on his own - grasping at straws is really not necessary. Ambi 02:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

To take Ambi's theme, who really, truly doesn't like Kim Carr, I think there should probably be even more quotes from the one they called the Supreme Leader (you think I'm kidding). There is no bias, his views on China and Syria are important in shaping opinion within the ALP due to his very senior status. I think he is famous for his views as much as his factional activity. DarrenRay 03:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not disputing that they warrant mentioning, but having them take up half the article is simply biased - it makes clear that the author didn't share his views and felt they were so heinous as to warrant extra-special scrutiny. This is particularly evident in the case of China, where the quote you've used is mostly just summarising the obvious. Soapboxing is bad. Ambi 04:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

You delete huge part of article and then say they should be mentioned. Not good. AChan 05:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Should there be some mention of Kim Carr's support for Mark Latham at the time Simon Crean resigned from the leadership (at the end of 2003), or is it best forgotten? 220.253.54.57 12:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)