Talk:Bob Brown

message: Interesting fact - Bob brown had his first brush with the media when announcing to media that Jimi Hendrix had died at the hospital he was working at in London.
See here - http://bulletin.ninemsn.com.au/bulletin/eddesk.nsf/All/5991B6D641758862CA256DD000073F7D
Jgritz 16:21, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Jimi Hendrix

message: Previously, this ariticle referred to Bob Brown as an Atheist, citing an abc interview where he states the following.
"…And had somebody tell me that the woman in charge – to my direction questioning – that people who hadn’t heard the name of Christ before Captain Cook arrived in the Pacific had all gone down to stoke coal. So I got up then and there and left. And I thought to myself ever since then, I’m amazed for so long I hung on to the mythical side of the old religions. But I’m very obliged to the ethical component which is very much part I think of human dignity and the reaching for a secure future that we have to get back into human affairs."
Which cleary implies that he may be an atheist, at the very least he is no longer "religious" in any formal sense. Following on in that interview, however, he states the following "So when you decided to come out and recognise yourself as a gay man, did it mean rejecting God?
Bob Brown:
No, it didn’t. It meant reformulating what the lifeforce is, and it is a mystery beyond comprehension. What are we doing here, How did we get here from the big bang and what was before that. Where are we going to? And why do we have this concept of purpose?
To me evolution, creativity in the universe isn’t wasteful. So there is this concept of purpose which we as human beings have. And as best I can see it’s up to us to set that purpose."
So what's the go? Atheist? New age mystic? The universe is god? Clive Hamilton has elsewhere stated that Bob is an atheist, and he is widely regarded as one. At the same time the only statement I can find from Bob on the matter was "lapsed presbyterian". So this is what I have put in the article. Please someone find a better reference! Puff Of Hot Air (talk) 12:53, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bob Brown the Atheist? 

message: The notion that Bob is Anti American is an entirely contested concept. Like much of the Australian population Bob has NOT expressed anti american sentiments, but rather sentiments oposing the behaviour of the US administration. The ideas are quite different, and key to understanding the conceptual modalities of the 'left' ideologies.
Feel free to adapt the text to reflect your conceptual modalities. If I disagree I will conceptually modalify it back again. :) Adam 05:12, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I am also not comfortable with this concept, while Brown is certainly anti-Bush and anti-GOP, I would not qualify him as an "anti-American" person. - Aaron Hill 06:47, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree. I wouldn't classify him as anti-America, and I doubt he would either. Ambivalenthysteria 07:53, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: *rolls eyes* Yes, it's necessary. As a queer woman myself, it's nice to be able to see the successes achieved by other queer people, and quite inspiring at that. Thus, the category system is useful for navigating with such things. Anyway, if you disagree with the category: go take it up on the category page itself, and not here. We've had this discussion about fifty times. Ambi 09:56, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's just that in Tassie this was never an issue in regards to his public image or his popularity, even pre '97 with the notorious 21 years law and a Tassie parliament full of conservative dinosaurs. I could fully understand it with someone like Rodney Croome (this guy needs an article...) Oh well. Jgritz 10:18, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  The category isn't there because he's controversial for being gay. The category is there because he is gay. ;) Ambi 11:26, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Read Talk:List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people/archive. Understand the angle now, but still disagree - first paragraph points out what my thoughts are. Jgritz 11:56, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK, but why? AFAIC, his being gay is about as important as whether he eats toast for breakfast. Is he included in the category of Toast Eaters? Is there a category for heterosexuals? If not, why not? There's nothing 'special' about being gay, it's just another aspect of nature, and highlighting it only perpetuates the myth that it's abnormal. --Bunzinator (talk) 13:59, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  I dont think its representative to refer to him as Anti American. 

message: I removed the statement "he would be 69 by the end of his third term" because I suggested it was not neutral point of view. The edit was reverted by Ambi who commented "It's true, and it's quite relevant" but that misses my point. As written on Wikipedia:NPOV_dispute:
:Even if something is a fact, or allegedly a fact, that does not mean that the bold statement of that fact is neutral
It is conceivable that the reference to his age has been placed there to present a point of view about a weakness in Bob Brown. Should the reference stay or go? Barrylb 10:13, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say lose the age reference. Who cares how old he'll be in 2310? It's not like he's breaking any records or anything. I don't see what it adds to the article. --Jgritz 10:16, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It makes clear, for starters, that his next term will almost certainly be his last - indeed, many commentators I read thought that he would retire as early as 2007. I really don't see why this presents an image of weakness on Brown's part, as he's still as active as he was twenty years ago. I think this is being just the slightest bit overzealous. Ambi 10:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  And he'd be 75 at the end of a fourth term. So? Even Johnny Howard's got 5 years on Bob. The average age of a legislative council member in Tasmaina is about 165, so it's nothing new down here. And all that bushwalking and healthy living is going to keep him going for a while yet. --Jgritz 10:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Looking back in the history I see it was first included in the context of speculation whether he would run again, especially given his age. He has announced his intention to run again so there isn't the same need to include a reference to his age which is a remnant from the speculation.  Barrylb 10:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is, really, as he's very unlikely to run for another term after this one - it's relevant that he's getting on (heck, if he were in the Labor Party, he'd be forced to retire as he'd be past compulsory retirement age). Personally, I hope he hangs around for as long as he can, but that doesn't make his age any less relevant. I really think you're reading too much into this. Ambi 10:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked John Howard's page to compare mentions of his age.  The last mention of Howards age I can see is "scored a sweeping victory at the 1996 elections over Keating to become Prime Minister of Australia at the age of 56".  And there is no mention under the heading "For as long as the party wants me" where his age would be a relevant factor.  On Kim Beazley's article, there is no mention of his age, but "By October 2005 he had spent 25 years in the House of Representatives and become the equal fourth longest-serving current member of the House" is mentioned.  I agree that the focus on Brown's age is not really appropriate and should be removed. Peter Campbell 11:40, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age reference 

message: I dont think that the information "and became recognised as the national leader of the anti-war left." is either accurate or NPOV. I think this part of the sentence should be deleted. Who is the "anti war left"? (no reference is provided).  I am not aware of any such group that would regard Brown as their national leader.  The most that could be said is that Brown became "an unofficial spokesperson for the anti war/peace movement".  
Also, I think the anti war (peace) movement transcends "left" and "right". The Federal Cabinet might have fallen lockstep in with Howard's push for war, but a lot of Liberal voters are not happy about it.  Also, Kerry Nettle has been equally outspoken (but not as well covered by the media) on opposing the Iraq war. Peter Campbell 11:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I've made a change. Barrylb 12:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti war left? 

message: Could someone update the picture with his current parliamentary photo?
http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/senators/homepages/senators.asp?id=QD4
The current one must be decades out of date. Sad mouse 00:55, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture update 

message: Is this a fact? His Memo book and a PDF file on his website state his house is in central Tasmania on the Liffey River, in the shadow of some mountain. It could well be he has a "house" there but not a "home" there, so the Hobart reference may well be right. I'm sure a contributor to the article could straighten this one out. Peter1968 01:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lives in Hobart? 

message: I was surprised that there was no mention of Bob's policy to ban coal exports.  So I added it myself.  I now know why there is no mention of this because a Greens supporter removed it within 15 minutes, claiming that my statement was incorrect (no - I didn't say ban within 3 years I said plan implemented within 3 years - Bob's own article said by the next election) and that my content was POV (no - it was fact.  He did attract scorn from the media and major political parties) and that my reference was POV (no - it is in the media and stated the position of major party politician who disagrees, thereby proving my point).  You are a self confessed Greens supporter (ie POV).  I just thought it was of interest.  Does anybody (including the above mentioned propaganda merchant) have anything to add to this debate?--Theophilus Thistler 13:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please review WP:NPOV the reference you cited does not provide accurate or balanced information. For contentious issues, it is standard practice to provide balanced  information and quotations (which I have added).  Also please review WP:CIVIL and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines regarding your criticism above of other editors.  Peter Campbell 14:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey what I said was fair enough.  My mistake was saying "media" instead of "sections of" which was corrected.  But I have found wikipedia to be awfully disturbing when people protect articles.  I am sure there are people out there who want to put their own political influence on articles.  But you will note my first correction was the "Nettle" issue (purely editorial).  I just want wikipedia to be a respected info source.  But the rest of my comments stay.  I didn't criticise other editors.  I described them.  My addition to the article was deleted to protect the reputation of the subject.  Without debate.  That is bias.  I included something that I believed was more important than Bob's age or sexuality and it was deleted within minutes.  I suggest you change your tone when you remove FACTUAL INFORMATION.  Suggest improvements, or even improve it yourself.  But don't just flip me off and say "POV".--Theophilus Thistler 15:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think what you said was fair enough at all.  You stridently attacked at least one editor - without actually specifically identifying them - with comments like "self confessed Greens supporter (ie POV)" and "the above mentioned propaganda merchant" and "people out there who want to put their own political influence on articles".  You also impugn editors motives when you claim that "My addition to the article was deleted to protect the reputation of the subject." Cloaking POV edits and citations with claims that right wing biased media sources (on their own) are factual and not biased does not cut the mustard.  You don't improve Wikipedia as as a respected info source by adding unbalanced biased content (which compromises Wikipedia as a respected source rather than improving it) and can expect that type of content to be reverted. The way around this is to ensure that when content added it is balanced, adheres to WP:NPOV and WP:CITE.  Specifically, a "for" and "against" reference on contentious topics (such as the misreporting of Brown's comments on a strategy coal exit) will usually suffice in this regard (as is now the case for the coal content). I think that the coal policy information good to include - but it must be balanced to be encyclopaedic, or Wikipedia becomes another tabloid.  Adhering to WP:CIVIL is also recommended.  Peter Campbell 00:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It's been a while so I'm not sure if I can find a reference but Brown's own comment was a challenge to the new parliament to come up with a plan by the end of its 3-year term, not implement the plan in 3 years Philip Machanick (talk) 12:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Brown's policy on coal

message: Maybe my brain's gone dead, but I have a clear recollection of Bob Brown being interviewed on radio some years ago, when he was asked about his birth name being Jack Spooner.  He was quite open about it, he confirmed he had been born Jack Spooner and his name was later changed, but I don't remember the circumstances - for example, whether his mother remarried and he took his new father's name; or whether he changed it himself by deed poll.  I checked on Google but nothing came up.  Can anyone confirm this?  --  JackofOz (talk) 06:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth name Jack Spooner

message: The article states that Brown pronounced Jimi Hendrix dead. The source quoted (see the PDF document) only infers Brown was a medical officer and present in the ward when Hendrix was admitted. Nothing in the source supports the article's speculation that Brown pronounced Hendrix dead. I have not found any other source indicating that Brown pronounced Hendrix dead.
On this basis, and also because its useless trivia anyway, I have deleted the Hendrix reference.--Mkativerata (talk) 05:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hendrix

message: The idea of a de-facto parliamentary leader (in the position box at the bottom of the page) is quite silly. There were only one or two AG senators during this period including Brown. It is completely contrary to Green principles to award any sort of leadership status without some form of approved process. It is also unprecedented to add a "de-facto" position in such a way for Australian political parties in Wikipedia. No such statement exists for Steve Fielding, or other minor party Senators who sat alone in the Senate (Greens WA, Nuclear Disarmament). Sambauers (talk) 06:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed removal of "de-facto" Parliamentary leader indications. 

message: Reports on this are sketchy and do not contain specific quotes of Brown saying he wants the coal industry to pay the entire bill for the floods. Media sources that quote a snippet of a politician's statement then claim he said something contentious not backed by a direct quote are a bit suspect especially when the politician concerned is not popular with the media. I would like to see a more authoritative source for this otherwise it's POV. Philip Machanick (talk) 12:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  removal of commentary on Qld floods 

message: In 2010, Brown was selected by readers of Samesame as one of the 25 most influential gay Australians.
203.14.171.241 (talk) 02:40, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Error in request edited by me. I think it's a legitimate request. Can someone else review and add or deny. Donama (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not done for now: Where is this supposed to be placed? – Ajltalk 05:56, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 203.14.171.241, 31 March 2011 

message: Bob Brown has received the following awards:
* International Merit Award of the IUCN (1984)
* UNEP Global 500 Award (1987)
* Goldman Environmental Prize (1990) 
* MAPW Distinguished Physician Award (1990)
http://www.bushheritage.org.au/about/people/our_patrons
* The Australian newspaper ‘Australian of the Year’ (1983)
* BBC Wildlife magazine ‘World's Most Inspiring Politician’ (1996)
* National Trust Australian National Treasure (1998)
* Rainforest Action Network Environmental Hero (2006)
http://www.australianpolitics.com/parties/greens/07-05-10_bob-brown-biography.pdf
* Australian Peace Prize (2009)
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/bob-brown-wins-australian-peace-prize-20090918-fv39.html
Also, he has since published another book, titled "Earth" (2009)
http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/4605481
Finally, the last two paragraphs in "State Politics" should be integrated into the section "Personal life". 
Charbono (talk) 16:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Could I also ask an admin to look at giving Charbono auto-confirmed privilege. Cheers, Donama (talk) 00:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Charbono, 17 May 2011 

message: I removed the following paragraph:
"In May 2011, Brown was involved in a dispute at a press conference where he attacked various journalists and described News Limited as the 'hate media'. He was widely condemed for this and was accused of being unable to 'take the pressure'. " 
for not following Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. As explained in my edit summary, Brown's position regarding the media is notable, but this should be presented in a comprehensive encyclopaedic format and from a neutral point of view. The above summary relies on an obviously non-neutral source - the alleged "hate media". Furthermore the summary misrepresents the content, when asserting that the cited article would indicate that [Brown] "attacked various journalists", "he was widely condemed" and "was accused of being unable to 'take the pressure'". Please discuss this issue here before attempting to reinsert it into the article. --Elekhh (talk) 23:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Elekhh here. That's not neutral the way it's written and I'm not sure whether the whole issue is even significant enough to include. At minimum something other than News Ltd should have reported on this, but I didn't see it anywhere else. Chris Ulman wrote an opinion piece on ABC Drum about how his interview with Brown didn't go so well, but then that's not impartial, being opinion and all, so probably no better as a source. Donama (talk) 00:18, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "Hate media"

message: Hi, just wondering how/if a link could be put into 'Trunkey Public School' to connect it to the page for Trunkey Creek, but without misnaming the school itself. Wasn't sure how to do this, so I didn't want to act rashly and make a mistake. Cheers. 116.250.91.37 (talk) 03:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Life, Trunkey Creek 

message: Bob Brown Greens leader is the primary noteability of Bob Brown compared to Bob Brown ALP MP. Therefore the article should not be disambiguated. Timeshift (talk) 06:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally agree. This was the starting point of the immediate previous thread up above. The matter should at least have been discussed here. What Do we do with those North Americans who think they know all there is to know about Australian politics? HiLo48 (talk) 06:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I forgot about the thread immediately above! I made some good points, didn't I :) Timeshift (talk) 06:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously, it would have been helpful if, before making the move, I had consulted the lengthy discussion above, from June 2012, rather than simply glancing at the Talk:Bob Brown (disambiguation) page, which has (as of this writing) no comments. North Americans had their own discussion of a somewhat similar nature, although quite a bit shorter, regarding the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC positioning of a currently-serving political figure who also bears a commonly-used name, Paul Ryan, at Talk:Paul Ryan/Archive 1#Requested move. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 07:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article should not be moved 

message: Substituted at 09:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bob Brown. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110124062941/http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/wcpa/wcpa_what/wcpa_awards/wcpa_packard/wcpa_packardalpha/ to http://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/wcpa/wcpa_what/wcpa_awards/wcpa_packard/wcpa_packardalpha
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723104807/http://www.global500.org/ViewLaureate.asp?ID=704 to http://www.global500.org/ViewLaureate.asp?ID=704
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101123030207/http://goldmanprize.org/node/85 to http://www.goldmanprize.org/node/85
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111020003438/http://www.iheu.org/australian-humanist-year-2010-bob-brown-political-activist to http://www.iheu.org/australian-humanist-year-2010-bob-brown-political-activist
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:16, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The construction of the (Saint)http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/gerard-henderson/media-watch-dog-qa-star-khaled-elomars-bigotry-revealed/news-story/446d00ecdae905fb2d920016577f2a9b Bob Brown mythology continues! He was not a foundation of the world´s first Green Party in the world (the United Tasmania Group - UTG, which began in 1972). He became involved three years after UTG was formed.  He was not the first Director of the Tasmanian Wilderness Society (he was the third). Norm Sanders was the first Green member elected to parliament (in Tasmania). Bob Brown has always been seen himself as charismatic leader,  and while he helped to achieve many things he was as much as anything the protected product of an ´inner elite´ (which I covered in my sociology Honours thesis).  Also, the Franklin River campaign was never the primary stimulus for the formation of the Tasmanian Wilderness Society.  I can confirm all of these statement as former State Secretary of the United Tasmania Group and as Assistant Director when the Tasmanian Wilderness Society was first formed (Kevin Kiernan was the Director).https://linctas.ent.sirsidynix.net.au/client/en_AU/all/search/detailnonmodal/ent:$002f$002fSD_ILS$002f0$002fSD_ILS:260511/one;jsessionid=B66BB6C70E7C85E95E399E6B635C12D5.enterprise-24600?qu=Occasional+paper+%28University+of+Tasmania.+Department+of+Sociology%29+no.+4.&ps=1000   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarmiento2015 (talk • contribs) 04:34, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: We need published sources for this stuff. The article doesn't claim he was the first director of the Tasmanian Wilderness Society, nor does it say the Franklin River campaign was the primary stimulus for the society. Sanders may have been small-g green, but he was a Democrat. Your word, unfortunately, is not a reliable source. Frickeg (talk) 05:51, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: January 2017

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Bob Brown. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629153238/http://www.australianpolitics.com/parties/greens/07-05-10_bob-brown-biography.pdf to http://www.australianpolitics.com/parties/greens/07-05-10_bob-brown-biography.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604214734/http://home.vicnet.net.au/~prsa/history/tascava.htm to http://home.vicnet.net.au/~prsa/history/tascava.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071129013824/http://www.bobbrown.org.au/600_media_sub.php?deptItemID=2190 to http://www.bobbrown.org.au/600_media_sub.php?deptItemID=2190
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071129013820/http://www.bobbrown.org.au/600_media_sub.php?deptItemID=1831 to http://www.bobbrown.org.au/600_media_sub.php?deptItemID=1831
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110313111933/http://bob-brown.greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/forestry-tasmania%E2%80%99s-bill-will-be-paid-time-says-brown to http://bob-brown.greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/forestry-tasmania%E2%80%99s-bill-will-be-paid-time-says-brown
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130501072443/http://www.spaceshipnews.com.au/photos-concert-for-the-kimberly-at-fremantle-esplanade/ to http://www.spaceshipnews.com.au/photos-concert-for-the-kimberly-at-fremantle-esplanade/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110324000513/http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/bob-brown-gives-away-his-house.htm to http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/bob-brown-gives-away-his-house.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629153238/http://www.australianpolitics.com/parties/greens/07-05-10_bob-brown-biography.pdf to http://www.australianpolitics.com/parties/greens/07-05-10_bob-brown-biography.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110219023257/http://poa.org.au/admin/?q=node%2F11 to http://poa.org.au/admin/?q=node%2F11
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) 11:36, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bob Brown. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110527150618/http://greens.org.au/content/what-did-bob-brown-really-say-about-floods to http://greens.org.au/content/what-did-bob-brown-really-say-about-floods
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) 00:38, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The word "Resigns" as the Greens leader appears to be a rude gesture at his resignation - rather than say "Resigned" as the Greens leader as a fact of the past, just wondering why we are using that present active tense 132.234.228.133 (talk) 11:39, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anything rude in that wording, but I do see clumsiness. I have changed it. Thanks for raising this here. HiLo48 (talk) 11:46, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Resigns" as Greens leader