Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Fathers' rights movement in Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Men's Issues

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Men's Issues, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Men's Issues articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Men's IssuesWikipedia:WikiProject Men's IssuesTemplate:WikiProject Men's IssuesMen's Issues articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

POV

The article is too self promotional, primarily based on press releases. No notable sources referenced nor any opposing views. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.116.29.210 (talk) 14:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Dispute

This article is clearly ideologically biased. Much of it is written entirely in a one-sided, argument-presenting tone. There are many value claims about things being positive / negative or good /bad which are mere opinion. In particular in the bottom two paragraphs of the main description there is no evidence which actually supports the opinion-based claims made. In particular the claim of 'a broadening of the definition of child abuse to include non-abusive behaviour' is particularly inflammatory and confusing. Much of the article is based on using ideological websites and the opinions on them as 'evidence' and 'fact.'

I would reccomend deleting these bottom 2 paragraphs entirely which do not serve any useful descriptive function. I would reccomend re-writing the entry as a list describing the different groups and their ideas instead of as this writers account of the issues which have been dealt with. The references can then be seen or framed as documents of these movements (which they are) instead of evidence or proof of particular ideological positions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenteame (talk • contribs) 03:34, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's written entirely like an essay not an encyclopedia article, but it does contain a lot of decent information, just needs a very thorough amount of work to change it, and then probably a good idea for the article to be locked or something.--Nelson21101805 (talk) 00:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dads in Distress

Dads in Distress is not a father's rights group it is a peer support group for separated parents — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boring user id (talk • contribs) 03:47, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Making Up Stats

The article was mis-citing statistics - if you follow the provided link, it actually didn't even provide those numbers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmkaele (talk • contribs) 13:52, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Fathers' rights movement in Australia. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:20, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]