Talk:Melbourne Club

message: I think it should be mentioned that it is known that people of Jewish descent are not allowed in the club, although the Melbourne Club denies this, there have been many reports of people not being accepted because of their Jewish nature and so on and so forth ...
As an actual member of this establishment, I can confirm that the club does have a number of Jewish members, more than the two Gentlemen mentioned. Readers should understand that membership is not simply for celebrities or the very rich. Wealth and position are not the criterion. The simple criterion is that each new member must be acceptable to every other member. 
The club is a home away from home where anyone can and does talk to everyone else about all sorts of subjects as complete equals. Wealth and position mean nothing in the club. That's what it's about.
What has happened in the past, despite our efforts to avoid embarasing anyone, is that one or two high profile candidates who believed they were entitled for one reason or another to become members,were silly enough to make their candidacy known to the press in the first place and have then used religion or racial background as an excuse to salve their injured dignity when declined.
As a general rule, a member would have to feel very strongly that a candidate was going to compromise this unique atmosphere to take any action. That action in the first part would be to raise the matter with the candidate's proposer, seconder and referees or "supporters". 
The matter would be resolved by either the quiet withdrawl of the nomination or by assuaging the concerns of the member who raised the matter. All of this happens confidentially so as not to embarrass anyone.  
In the matter of the last three "public" failed candidates, I can assure readers that it had nothing to do with their religion. They were also warned that persisting with their candidacy to the point where a vote would be taken, in the face of a lukewarm, if not hostile reception from the membership, might result in public embarrassment
In response to this long and rickety explanation, to be fair, it looks like the club was more embarrassed than they were.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.90.21.183 (talk) 12:37, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exclusion 

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Restaurants or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. You can find the related request for tagging here  -- TinucherianBot (talk) 10:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD]] Tagging

message: I have found conflicting reports on the year of the Melbourne Club's founding.
This article says it was founded in 1838, while the article links a book (which I have not had a chance to get access to) that says the club was founded in 1878.
Does anyone have some clarity on its establishment date?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.176.111.34 (talk) 02:13, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year of the club's founding? 

message: I came here specifically to see what the current status of this club is, regarding their acceptance of females, and it seems like this isn't mentioned at all in the article, despite the fact that this has been covered prominently in the media. Unless there are any meaningful objections, I'll be updating the article substantially.--Senor Freebie (talk) 13:47, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why aren't the controversies on gender mentioned?