Talk:Matthew Guy

message: Tony Madafferi has been accused of murder Guy went to a dinner with him?
:1. Please read WP:SIGN. 
:2. You want add that someone who is not the subject of this article was ACCUSED of murder. "Accused" does not mean guilty. Please read WP:BLP. HiLo48 (talk) 10:29, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Just saw this after I spoke to you on your page okay I acknowledge what you say.110.22.50.32 (talk) 10:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool. Now read WP:INDENT. HiLo48 (talk) 10:33, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Lobster Cave]] 

message: []  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.22.50.32 (talk) 10:37, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guy on intersection removals

message: Peter Reith should be refer to as the former deputy Liberal leader not as the former Howard Government Minister.122.106.83.10 (talk) 12:59, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? Both are correct, and he's better known as a minister. Frickeg (talk) 20:17, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Former Deputy Liberal Leader Peter Reith 

message: In background 
Guy has said he was not ashamed to say he is a Christian.[4]
This is unnecessary, and reads as a political statement rather than a biographical statement.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.232.27 (talk) 09:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian views 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: @Ecangola, @Macktheknifeau, & @anyone_else_who_is_interested: I have removed this section as I believe that it does not adhere to WP:NPOV standards. I say this as, firstly, the section entirely places undue weight on the negative portions of his campaign, isn't balanced, and isn't written in a neutral tone. Secondly, I feel as though that the section places too much weight on news that a) doesn't have much connection to Matthew Guy, and b) doesn't have much connection to Matthew Guy's 2022 election campaign. Lastly, the section doesn't have much encyclopaedic value, I would describe it as trivial information that didn't survival the 24HR news cycle. - GA Melbourne (talk) 13:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted your deletions as there is no legitimate reason for them. The sections I added are reliably sourced and WP:WHATABOUTX regarding other elements of the campaign not being there is irrelevant to the existing text. Feel free to add your own additions from reliable sources about other parts of the campaign if you desire. I disagree that either of the sections are 'undue weight', searching google for 'Matthew Guy' the 5th result is his defence of the anti-vax advertising and searching "David Southwick" brings up two articles referencing the staffers being used and Guy's defence of them, making them both 'due weight'. The sections in question only add up to 3 lines of 109 words total and this campaign is the biggest moment in Guy's political career and these two incidents the biggest news stories from Guy so far, they are hardly "trivial". I don't think Wikipedia needs to be biased towards the Coalition by ignoring reliable sources by suggesting it breaches NPOV to mention them solely because the media views them as a negative for Guy. Macktheknifeau (talk) 16:41, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, I would prefer if we reached a consensus prior to reimplementing the content, I still think that this section contains info that isn't really solid enough for wikipedia therefore I shall request a third opinion. - GA Melbourne (talk) 23:22, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Why didn't you seek consensus prior to removing the content? Macktheknifeau (talk) 03:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:BRD - GA Melbourne (talk) 08:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

text: The content is reliably sourced, not just to reliable sources from Australia but from England even with the Guardian articles.  At least the first paragraph is due; the Guardian article used is specifically about Guy.  That would be solved by rephrasing.  That's very doubtful considering international press covered the incidents. Robby.is.on (talk) 23:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Robby.is.on: Mind you it's an article written by The Guardian: Australian Edition by the Australian Associated Press. - GA Melbourne (talk) 00:03, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not really relevant where the article is from as there's no requirement for an article to have international sources. Macktheknifeau (talk) 04:05, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of section (2022 Victorian state election)