Talk:Lee Rhiannon/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Redaction of son's name

I redacted personal information about Rhiannon's son as recommended by Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Privacy_of_names. The movement of the paragraph to a new section "Controversies" is a bit inappropriate, but there was no other "current events" detail like this in the article which it could be grouped under. I tend to think that the information is not noteworthy as it is about a non-notable separate adult (albeit her son), but it is referenced so I have left it for now with personal information redacted. Sambauers (talk) 06:47, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I have removed it and suggest it not be replaced, this article is about Lee not her son, it is coat-racking to add it here, if her son is notable (which he isn't) then create an article about him. Off2riorob (talk) 12:33, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Lack of Balance?

This article reads like an advertisement for Lee Rhiannon. Negative issues are suspiciously absent for a public figure.

No mention that:

Her mother was a prominent Stalinist, and one of the CPA members who left in 1971 to form the SPA since the CPA was criticising the Soviet Union, specifically the 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia.

Lee was not an innocent victim of ASIO - she was a self-avowed "revolutionary".

Lee herself joined the Stalinist SPA, and was active in it until the 1980's. Her support of the Soviet Union was never in doubt - she "aggressively praised" endorsement of Moscow’s invasion of Czechoslovakia.

Despite being in the Greens, she almost never talks about environmental issues.

Article here: http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/wordpress/?p=455 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.68.54 (talk • contribs) u

Take your anonymous bias elsewhere. There is no source for any of your claims (and no, the article you link to is not reliable). Sambauers (talk) 06:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

1) These facts are matters of public & private record. The documents (university newspapers, membership records, ASIO files) still exist. 2) Ms Rhiannon/O'Gorman/Brown doesn't ever deny them - she just picks on any small inaccuracies in detail (like specific dates) & having distracted the audience, dodges the bulk of the issue by not addressing it at all. 3) The world can see my IP Address. It is unique. This makes me less anonymous than, say, "Sambauers" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.68.54 (talk) 09:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Dear 60.240.68.54, that's my full name actually. You are anonymous. --Sambauers (talk) 01:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Copyright violations

While googling to try to find references for statements that were tagged with citiation needed, I came across Lee Rhiannon's biography on her own personal web site. It is quite clear that much of this article was copied and pasted from that site, making it a copyright violation. As such, I'm about to remove the parts of the article that are obviously direct copies from that article, and will try to clean up what's left. --Athol Mullen (talk) 09:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

You've made an assumption that the author of those words was not the same person, and fundamentally modified the article on a thin premise. --Sambauers (talk) 01:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Membership of the SPA/"Smears"

In the first para there is reference to Rhiannon being "smeared" by the other parties on the basis of her involvement in the SPA/CPA. It gives two citations in support of this but neither link to evidence of smears. Was or wasn't she a member of the party? Evidence please. Have the other parties or media made reference to this in criticising her? Evidence please.

I removed two citations that were not WP:RS and trimmed the disputed as per your comment. Off2riorob (talk) 21:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Attitude of parents

The article says "Rhiannon has said her parents became disillusioned with Moscow following the 1968 Soviet invasion of Chekoslovakia (sic)." Can we have a source for this assertion? If she did say this, she was wrong, since Bill and Freda Brown left the CPA because of its opposition to the invasion of Czechoslovakia. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 10:53, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

That is the opposite of what Rhiannon says in The Australian article linked to those reamrks. You might be right, but what's your source here?Observoz (talk) 03:34, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Mr Toad is right. Rhiannon's Green flunkies on here (Sam Bauers et al) seem incapable of conceiving that Rhiannnon is capable of lying to further her political career. Paul Austin (talk) 11:28, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Saying it is right over and over is not much use. You need references, especially if you are going to accuse someone of lying. Sambauers (talk) 05:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC) (Flunky)

The Australian is not a WP:RS on Green issues

Just a quick reminder that The Oz is not a reliable source when it comes to the Greens. Thanks. Timeshift (talk) 06:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

With respect, on what basis do you make that assertion? The consensus view on the linked discussion you provide seems to be that The Oz may be used on a "case by case" basis? This is the correct view in any case, as The Australian is one of Australia's major papers' of record. It may be cited under the ordinary requirements of Wikipedia (ie editorialisation etc are to be avoided).Observoz (talk) 11:09, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2