Talk:Paul Keating
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Captain Wacky
Why does "Captain Wacky" redirect here?
It was one of the Great Leader's many epithets. (We miss him, for all his wackiness.) Adam 05:53, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Negativity?
Is it just me, or does this article seem slightly negative towards Keating? Perhaps I;m just tired, but I got that impression reading it.--cj | talk 09:16, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
To me, that bit about "the left-leaning intellectual classes of Melbourne and Sydney" smacks of outright bias; it sounds like a right-wing tabloid opinion piece. (I wasn't aware that there were "intellectual classes" [plural!] in Melbourne and Sydney, but even if it were so, the sneer in this paragraph is barely contained and makes for a very POV section.) "Keating failed to notice"... I mean, c'mon! References? --150.101.27.130 15:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Positivity?
How can you have an entry on Paul Keating without any mention of "The recession we had to have..." his most famous quote and centrepiece of his historical memory? This page is clearly biast towards a positive history of Keating. It totally glosses over his Prime-ministrialship and reasons for electoral defeat. --Blargon 10:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
- Whether that really is the "centrepiece" as you claim depends more so on from which direction you are looking. There would easily be half-a-dozen or more quotes from him with at least equal claim to fame/notoriety. If you think there's something missing, then add it...if anything, the present treatment is a little too dry, for one of the more colourful political characters this century- whatever one's views. True, there are many areas in which the present article could be usefully expanded; however I don't think that bias of one sort or another is its main deficiency.--cjllw | TALK 02:40, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- The account of Keatings career demise needs major expansion.
"These issues, which came to be known as Keating's "big picture," were highly popular with the tertiary-educated middle class, but failed to capture the aspirations of rural and outer-suburban voters. The loss of the "aspirational" traditionally working-class and Labor-voting outer suburbs has been a continuing problem for the ALP post-Keating."
What about the recession we had to have!!!!!!! What about the bulk property foreclosures, soaring interest rates, record unemployment? Whether or not these things are attributeable to Keating's policy - they are still notable as factors that seriously influenced his oust from power. --Never29 03:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Interest rates were higher in 1990, when Labor won, than in 1996, when they lost. And we did not have "record unemployment." Ever heard of the Great Depression? Adam 10:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
I think Paul Keatings cool, don't get me wrong but you can't deny he copped the flak for Australia's poor economic performance. thats considered a reason why he lost the election to the evil unsuffering liberal govt we have now. Wasn't Keating treasurer before he was PM anyway? --Never29 01:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- By the time Labor lost in 1996, Australia was already in it's 4th year of positive economic growth since that recession. Unemployment was down to less than 8% and falling. I don't think economic factors were that significant in the loss. Unless it was a hangover from 1993, which I doubt. Australians were just sick of the ageing government and wanted change. It'll happen to Howard too. Kewpid 13:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I'd agree. Remember those completely inane "it's time for a change" ads?
[edit] The Royal Incident
It should be noted that the main reason Paul Keating is famous overseas is the incident where he put his arm around the Queen, breaking Royal protocol. I think it warrants at least a sentence. --Breadandcheese 08:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
"Royal protocol", ptui. He did not "put his arm around her," he helped her to her car for about two seconds. It was a trivial incident which was beaten up by the London tabloids for their own grubby purposes. Adam 10:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Wiki has to be neutral! Whether he put his arm around her, pinched her bum or was just being courteous and polite, the event still occured! However you want to describe it! --Never29 01:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- It's not that the event occured - it's how it should be interpreted and what significance should be attached to it. In the latter case, I'm pretty sure it's minimal. If you don't believe me, pick up a political biography of Keating and see what significance gets attached to it there. Slac speak up! 05:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
If we do the Google test, we find there are only a few hundred mentions of the "Lizard of Oz" incident. Hence it's not significant.--Jack Upland 02:32, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- There are actually lots more references for "Lizard of Oz" and "Hands Off Cobber". Breadandcheese is right, it's Keating's main claim to fame in the UK. A quick straw poll around my office here in London found all the Brits remember it and none of them can remember anything else about the man. It would be great if we could get some of those screaming front page headlines scanned, but I can't find any of them Shermozle 14:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- It's basically all he is known for in the states, also. Not that he comes up very often at all. youngamerican (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
- There are actually lots more references for "Lizard of Oz" and "Hands Off Cobber". Breadandcheese is right, it's Keating's main claim to fame in the UK. A quick straw poll around my office here in London found all the Brits remember it and none of them can remember anything else about the man. It would be great if we could get some of those screaming front page headlines scanned, but I can't find any of them Shermozle 14:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Photograph
That is a truly awful photograph. Can't we find something that's better? Paul Keating always looked smart and this photo doesn't do him justice. --Jumbo 06:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
You'll have to take it up with the photonazis. I don't understand why Wikipedia can't buy the rights to agency photos like every other encyclopaedia does. Adam 06:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unsubstantiated rumours
As noted by others (see history) WP:BLP does not allow for unsourced defamatory material on article or discussion pages. I haven't seen any credible sources for the material so far mentioned and I am removing this discussion for this talk page and that of Sir John Kerr's. I trust that this is acceptable to the reasonable editors participating in the discussion. --Jumbo 02:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I am deleting all further unsigned comments from this Anon, at this and all other articles on my watchlist. Adam 08:00, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] removal of labor party logo and what about flags?
I have just removed the ALP logo from the infobox because its use is not WP:FAIR. I had previously removed the Australian Flag because of the view that flags are unnecessary additions to infoboxes. The flag should stay if that is the consensus decision. Cheers, Jpe|ob 01:42, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think it may well be. The page should probably stay as is. Cheers, Jpe|ob 01:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Minister for the Northern Territories v Minister for Northern Australia
In the "Early life" section, I corrected 'Keating was a backbencher for most of the Whitlam Labor government, but briefly became Minister for the Northern Territories in 1975' to 'Keating was a backbencher for most of the Whitlam Labor government, but briefly became Minister for Northern Australia in 1975'. (I admit I was puzzled by the Ministerial title. I would have thought it would hsve been 'Minister for the Northern Territory'. But I was wrong.) See: The Australian National Archive 1975 Cabinet Records
Shirt58 Monday 16 October 2006 7:24:05 (UTC)
- Yeah. Whitlam changed the name of that ministry in June 1975 from "Northern Territory" to "Northern Australia". One of Gough's lesser known achievements ;-) Fraser changed it back again in December. Leeborkman 14:38, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali affair
Should we mention that Keating formally approved residency for radical cleric Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali?
124.183.103.181 00:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't think so. Keating had a role in approving residency for Al Hilali, who is a minor person. In the context of his twenty seven year political career, the last thirteen of which were spent on the Government frontbench and the last five spent as prime minister, this incident is not significant enough to appear in his article. In all honesty it was a media storm in a tea cup that lasted all of one day. I suggest that we revisit the issue in a month, and, if its still newsworthy at the time, then it should be added.I elliot 12:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "The recession we had to have..."
I believe this was mentioned earlier on this talk page, but should their be some mention in the article in regards to this quote? It is a fairly significant and well known quote related to Keating, and to be honest, I was quite surprised that it wasn't present in his article. I was going to tie it in along with the recession itself, but I thought it would be more prudent to check here first due to its controversial nature. Regards, --Auger Martel 21:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)