Talk:Richard Worth

message: I've uploaded an Image of Richard Worth to WikiMedia, but can't work out how to have it appear as an embedded image in this page. The Image is: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Richard_Worth,_New_Zealand_MP.jpg
:Added. Thanks for the photo.-gadfium 18:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help linking to a file 

message: There appear to have been two series of edits by a User:Richard_W_Worth who appears to be the subject of this page:
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Worth&diff=280739020&oldid=280707924
* http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Worth&diff=257418875&oldid=257229387
The first of these has effectively been undone already, but I'm about to rewrite the second, since they appear to breach Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. The user has been warned on their  talk page. 
Stuartyeates (talk) 07:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If the user continues I would recommend a ban. Bactoid (talk) 05:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I don't think banning is warranted. One edit was adding useful information to the article. The other was something I would have preferred he make a request on this talk page about, since it involved a paragraph critical of him. I don't think the rewording was objectionable and I would have accepted that from a neutral editor. I note that no one has substantially altered the text of the paragraph since, so it appears no one else objects to the new wording. While the edit removed the reference, I suspect that this would be due to unfamiliarity with the Wikipedia interface rather than bad faith.-gadfium 06:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a note that these edits have now been picked up by the Media. In this case tvnzBrian | (Talk) 06:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

text: As an aside one would hope that our elected officials would have better things to do ... like running the country! Bactoid (talk) 07:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of interest 

message: These matters were discussed in the house. This link is to the uncorrected hansard:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/QOA/6/2/3/49HansQ_20090402_00000243-5-Internal-Affairs-Minister-Ministerial.htm
Stuartyeates (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The above link no longer works. The debate can be seen at .-gadfium 01:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Or an even deeper link at http://theyworkforyou.co.nz/portfolios/internal_affairs/2009/apr/02/ministerial_requirements#labour_12 Lanma726 (talk) 02:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of wikipedia in Hansard 

message: I'd like to propose adding this new section to the article. I've used Hansard rather than theyworkforyou links, because Hansard is more authoritative (I believe). I've not made the addition myself, since as the discoverer of the COI, I could be seen to have a COI myself.
===Wikipedia Conflict of Interest Controversy===
On 30 March 2009,  someone using the name Richard W Worth made a pair of edits   which removed a reference which showed Worth in a partially negative light and changed a potential conflict of interest to a perception of a potential conflict of interest. On 1 April 2009, these edits were noticed and the issue received media coverage.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10564948http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/2310895/More-Indian-heat-on-Worth
The matter was raised twice in the house under parliamentary privilege, both times by Labour's Pete Hodgson, on the 2nd and 8th of April respectively:
:Why did the Minister tamper with his own Wikipedia entry earlier this week, and does he intend to take the advice Wikipedia gave him yesterday afternoon that he should consult Wikipedia’s conflict of interest guidelines?http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/9/a/d/49HansD_20090402_00000119-Questions-for-Oral-Answer-Questions-to-Ministers.htm
:Dr Worth fiddled his own Wikipedia entry—this is interesting—was caught, and was told off by Wikipedia. That was done instead of doing proper housework, like going to the Brookers website for the nation’s law directory and correcting his own entry, which even today says Dr Worth is a consultant for Simpson Grierson—as he holds the job of a Minister of the Crown!http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/0/e/b/49HansD_20090408_00001158-General-Debate.htm
In neither debate was there a clear denial or admission that the user of the Richard W Worth account was Worth.
:I think the incident is too minor to be added to the article. TV3 news last night gave a list of his previous misdeeds which included the camel riding incident in Egypt when he should have been attending a war memorial service, and the visit he made to a victim in hospital, neither of which we currently mention, but it didn't include editing his Wikipedia article. Also, we shouldn't make the article simply a list of mistakes he might have made.-gadfium 03:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right gadfium. I've just seen the press template over at Talk:Sam Lotu-Iiga, and that seems to be a much better way of handling this (and keeping it on the talk page). Stuartyeates (talk) 20:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

text: I agree with gadfium - it is too minor to be included. More notable stuff should be included first. Also, it smacks a little bit of blowing our own trumpet. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed addition 

message: On 30 March 2009,  someone using the name Richard W Worth made a pair of edits   which removed a reference which showed Worth in a partially negative light and changed a potential conflict of interest to a perception of a potential conflict of interest. On 1 April 2009, these edits were noticed and the issue received media coverage.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10564948http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/2310895/More-Indian-heat-on-Worth
The matter was raised twice in the house under parliamentary privilege, both times by Labour's Pete Hodgson, on the 2nd and 8th of April respectively:
:Why did the Minister tamper with his own Wikipedia entry earlier this week, and does he intend to take the advice Wikipedia gave him yesterday afternoon that he should consult Wikipedia’s conflict of interest guidelines?http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/9/a/d/49HansD_20090402_00000119-Questions-for-Oral-Answer-Questions-to-Ministers.htm
:Dr Worth fiddled his own Wikipedia entry—this is interesting—was caught, and was told off by Wikipedia. That was done instead of doing proper housework, like going to the Brookers website for the nation’s law directory and correcting his own entry, which even today says Dr Worth is a consultant for Simpson Grierson—as he holds the job of a Minister of the Crown!http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/0/e/b/49HansD_20090408_00001158-General-Debate.htm
In neither debate was there a clear denial or admission that the user of the Richard W Worth account was Worth.
:I think the incident is too minor to be added to the article. TV3 news last night gave a list of his previous misdeeds which included the camel riding incident in Egypt when he should have been attending a war memorial service, and the visit he made to a victim in hospital, neither of which we currently mention, but it didn't include editing his Wikipedia article. Also, we shouldn't make the article simply a list of mistakes he might have made.-gadfium 03:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right gadfium. I've just seen the press template over at Talk:Sam Lotu-Iiga, and that seems to be a much better way of handling this (and keeping it on the talk page). Stuartyeates (talk) 20:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

text: I agree with gadfium - it is too minor to be included. More notable stuff should be included first. Also, it smacks a little bit of blowing our own trumpet. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia Conflict of Interest Controversy

message: The subject's post nominal letters were shown as OBE VRD KStJ. The New Zealand Order of Wear shows the KStJ is higher than the VRD so have changed order to OBE KStJ VRD. ---- Karl Stephens (talk) 10:55, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of Post Nominal Letter 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Richard Worth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://cat.lib.rmit.edu.au/vwebv/holdingsInfo?bibId=79039
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090421040845/http://2005.electionresults.govt.nz/e9/html/e9_part4.html to http://2005.electionresults.govt.nz/e9/html/e9_part4.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090209054013/http://2008.electionresults.govt.nz/e9/html/e9_part4.html to http://2008.electionresults.govt.nz/e9/html/e9_part4.html
*Added  tag to http://cat.lib.rmit.edu.au/vwebv/holdingsInfo?bibId=79039
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:41, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified