Talk:Moira Deeming

WP:BLP/N

This article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Moira Deeming. TarnishedPath^talk 10:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Status of legal action against John Pesutto

This article says: During her suspension from the party, Deeming threatened party leader Pesutto with legal action, but backed away after a fresh attempt was made to oust her from the party. This second effort, led by former party leader Matthew Guy, saw Deeming back away from her threat of legal action. and Deeming reportedly returned to threatening the Liberal Party leader again after sending a letter reiterating the threat of a defamation case.

But the article on John Pesutto says: Pesutto's actions in relation to the Moira Deeming affair had led to three defamation lawsuits being filed against him by Deeming, Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull and Angela Jones, with the three cases set be heard together in a 15 day trial to commence on 16 September 2024. On 16 May 2024, Pesutto settled the two cases involving Kellie-Jay Keen and Angie Jones, with the Deeming case remaining in place;….

So this sounds as if the defamation claim by Deeming is still going ahead. I don’t follow Australian politics – what is the situation on this? Sweet6970 (talk) 13:47, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Looks like the court case is scheduled for September. So we probably need to update both articles to reflect this new information. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 14:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Moira Deeming/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: TarnishedPath (talk · contribs) 12:00, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Steelkamp (talk · contribs) 06:44, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

I'll be comparing this article to Nick Goiran, one of my own GAs on an Australian politician.

Prose

General

• Pronouns should not be used at the start of each paragraph before mentioning Deeming by name. For example, On 27 March 2023, she was suspended should be changed to On 27 March 2023, Deeming was suspended. Another example is She is anti-abortion and believes that laws legalising abortion need to be repealed should be changed to Deeming is anti-abortion and believes that laws legalising abortion need to be repealed.
• Most of this article consists of many very short paragraphs, which does not make for the best writing. Paragraphs should be combined and the sentences rewritten to flow well into one another. In some cases, there may be scope to add additional prose to the paragraph instead.
• In the same vein, multiple short sections such as those under the Political career section should be combined. I think all those sections except "Anti-trans rally" and "Expulsion from the Liberal Party" should be combined into one section.
• I think the political views section should be below the political career section, like on Nick Goiran.

Lead

• The first paragraph needs some rewording. The first sentence is really short. The second sentence starts off by saying that She is a former member of the parliamentary Liberal Party, but at this point in the lead, its not stated which parliament she is a part of. It also does not say that the Victorian Legislative Council is part of the parliament. I suggest changing the first paragraph to this: Moira Deeming is an Australian politician who has been a member for the Western Metropolitan Region of the Victorian Legislative Council, the upper house of the Parliament of Victoria, since November 2022. She is currently an Independent Liberal, having been expelled from the parliamentary Liberal Party. She is
• The second paragraph starts out mysteriously. It takes until one is halfway through the paragraph to find out why she was expelled. I would start this paragraph out by saying what Deeming is most well known for (her views on trans people), and then walk though the suspension and expulsion chronologically.

Early life, personal life and education

• Deeming was "born and bred on the political left coming from a long line of union leaders, card-carrying Labor Party members, and Labor MPs". It should be stated that this quote is a description of herself from her inaugural speech.
• city of Melbourne should be linked (and the "c" capitalised).
• All four of these paragraphs start with the same word (Deeming), which gets very repetitive. The paragraphs are also very short, as I talked about above.
• Is there a better source for her high school than the Institute of Public Affairs?

Political career

• It should be said that Scott Morrison was the prime minister.
• Deeming's preselection was considered controversial. This paragraph should be combined with the previous paragraph because it follows on from that paragraph and they are both short.
• Deeming later described during her defamation suit against John Pesutto. The defamation suit isn't established at this point in the article, so this statement comes out of nowhere.
• The article should establish who Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull is. Something like British anti-transgender rights activist Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull.
• I don't see why Nathan Bull is mentioned. He is not notable for Wikipedia. Do news reports mention him as a significant figure at the rally?
• In a public statement describing Deeming's position as "untenable" due to her "involvement in organising, promoting and participating in a rally with speakers and other organisers who themselves have been publicly associated with far right-wing extremist groups including neo-Nazi activists", Liberal opposition leader John Pesutto moved to expel her from the party. This sentence continues on for far too long before naming Pesutto. It should be reworded so that Pesutto is named at the start.
• It was believed that Deeming was also supported by Chris Crewther, Matthew Guy, Bill Tilley, David Hodgett, and Ann-Marie Hermans. Who believed this?
• due to the in-fighting the rally has caused in the party. This is the first mention of any in-fighting. This should be elaborated.
• I'm not a fan of the use of the word "reportedly", as it creates doubt in the reader's mind.
• In the end. I feel like this is skipping over a lot of stuff.
• There is almost no coverage of the defamation court case.

References

• Some of the formatting of the names in citations is messed up. For example, citation 5 has |last=Abbott |first=Sumeyya Ilanbey, Broede Carmody, Lachlan.
• Reference 23 doesn't state its on YouTube.
• She is anti-abortion and believes that laws legalising abortion need to be repealed, and believes that rape victims should reject abortions and turn to God and to the church instead. She is against voluntary euthanasia. The sourcing here concerns me. Surely this stuff is covered in reputable newspapers such as The Age or The Australian. I see the first sentence has a source to The Australian, which is good, but its also sourced to The Daily Declaration, which I am concerned about. The rest of the paragraph is exclusively sourced to The Daily Declaration.
• There are some sentences which are unsourced, such as Deeming was successfully elected to the Legislative Council. and a label often used to designate politicians who are members of the Liberal Party yet who are not members of the party's parliamentary caucus.

Images

• Both images should have alt text added, although this is optional as its not included in the good article criteria.

Overall

I am going to have to quick fail this review, as per criterion 1: the article is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria. Particularly the criteria for being well written due to the numerous short paragraphs and short sections, and the criteria for being broad in its coverage, due to the lack of detail of the suspension process and legal action. Steelkamp (talk) 10:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@Steelkamp, thank you for your review. I'll work at addressing these issues and renominate at a later point. TarnishedPath^talk 10:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)