Talk:Wyatt Roy

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Australia: Queensland / Politics Low‑importance

	Australia portal Wyatt Roy is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Untitled

The entry lists his Alma Mater as UQ, but he didn't graduate. Maybe that should be made more clear, anyone reading the entry would think he had a degree.55604PP (talk) 12:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reckon it could still be his alma mater even if he didn't graduate. It is possible for a University to have a profound influence over a person even if they didn't get the points to get a degree. Many people leave a degree early because they pick up an opportunity to get into the industry early. Bill Gates, Matt Lauer... - Richard Cavell (talk) 13:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what kind of profound influence UQ had on him---maybe he found himself. But my point is about clarity: when I read the entry I assumed he had a degree (because that's what alma mater means). I was surprised to read elsewhere that he doesn't. Shouldn't this be clearer? In fact, Bill Gates' entry says "Alma Mater: Harvard University (dropped out in 1975)".55604PP (talk) 20:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(And Matt Lauer I think does have a degree, from his alma mater ohio uni.)55604PP (talk) 20:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both Matt Lauer and Bill Gates dropped out to pursue opportunities in their chosen career paths. Obviously both were wildly successful, and no one could blame them for it. Lauer returned to complete his degree after many years. He submitted an interview with President Bush for his final mark. - Richard Cavell (talk) 09:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK fine, but we've drifted far off the point. I'm not interested in BG's or ML's pathways to success. I'm interested in whether we should change Mr Roy's entry to something a bit clearer, perhaps something like "Alma mater: UQ (currently unfinished due to his election to the House or Reps)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.132.146 (talk) 17:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alma mater: University of Queensland (has not completed degree) or something like that is fine with me. We shouldn't assume that his election is the reason why his degree is unfinished. It's probably just that he hasn't had enough time to complete the degree. Most people get a degree when they're 21-24, not 20. - Richard Cavell (talk) 04:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Roy suffered a near disaster ...

What constitutes a disaster? Just because the SMH reports a minor incident during an election campaign as a disaster is clearly not in the same category as the Lockerbie disaster or perhaps natural disasters, such as the 2010 Pakistan floods where the UN estimates that over 20 million people are homeless. So, we need some perspective here. In the context of Roy's election as the youngest MP ever, I think the whole third paragraph should be deleted. It has no real standing other than a throw-away line by two journalists in a Sunday newspaper. Jherschel (talk) 11:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm probably biased in that I wrote that paragraph and you're right that using "disaster" is probably to extreme, but I do think that it definitely needs to be mentioned that he probably only won the seat because Sullivan criticised that disabled boy's father on national tv. Jenks24 (talk) 12:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm, just a little biased :-) I am, though, doubting your suggestion that Roy "... ONLY won the seat because Sullivan criticised that disabled boy's father....". Whilst it may rate a mention, Sullivan was quoted in yesterday's local newspaper (perhaps not the best source) that "Given the size of the swing in Queensland, there was no way I was going to be sustained when we were on a 1.87 percent margin". The same article also said that ".....Sullivan dismissed factors such as the Labor Party’s leadership change and last week’s gaffe at Morayfield in which he questioned why the father of a disabled child would wait two years to see a specialist for his defeat...." If you're agreeable, I will rewrite the 3rd para and mention Sullivan's gaffe and that it MAY have been a factor. Only time will tell. Jherschel (talk) 11:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sounds good to me. I appreciate that you brought this up on the talk page, rather than just rewriting it straight away :) Jenks24 (talk) 13:00, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Done. See what you think now. Jherschel (talk) 09:33, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tidied up one small thing so it made more sense, but other than that it looks good. Very well referenced :) Jenks24 (talk) 11:26, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; and thanks. My mum told me that, upon receipt of a compliment, to always look the person in the eye, smile and say "thank you" :-) "Thank you" Jherschel (talk) 07:26, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Brisbane father, Mr Murphy, an unemployed factory hand who sparked pre-election outrage when he questioned a Labor MP about the treatment of his disabled son has since admitted he lied. He was quoted as saying that his son was never waiting on a list for treatment. This is despite telling the public forum two weeks ago: "It's taken two years for my son — to take him to the doctor and get him diagnosed — because we don't have the money to actually go and pay for a specialist to get him diagnosed so he can get the proper help that he needs at school". http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/7955671/father-who-took-out-labor-mp-admits-lies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.35.135.136 (talk) 05:24, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]