Talk:Peter Dutton

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peter Dutton article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Australia: Brisbane / Queensland / Politics Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Peter Dutton 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Brisbane task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Doug Dingwall (30 November 2017). "Government web address used to add 'Lucifer' to Peter Dutton's name". Canberra Times. Retrieved 30 November 2017.

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.

Sayanim

It's fairly obvious that Dutton is a Sayanim for Mossad - he only defends israel and hates palestine, lebanon and Gaza. This neeeds to be a addressed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:D002:E504:2800:F583:D2D4:EA08:D8CF (talk) 01:55, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reliable source that supports your assertion. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legal action against Dutton

I don't know if any of these sources are reliable or fulfil other WP rules, so I thought I should put these here. Dutton has been taken to the Australian Human Rights Commission for violations of the Racial Discrimination Act re his comments about the war in the Middle East. See here, here and here. I'm also not sure if this can be put in an existing section or a new one should be started. If it pans out the way I think it might (yes I know I'm crystal balling) this could be a big story, but naturally we don't know yet. I'll leave it to more knowledgeable editors. BerleT (talk) 01:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Factional alignment

User:ITBF has removed Dutton's factional alignment from the page multiple times.

It is trivial to find multiple sources, including from last week, describing his alignment as National Right (Liberal Party of Australia). https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/liberal-moderates-were-in-the-winner-s-circle-under-turnbull-it-s-a-different-story-now-20241212-p5ky21.html

To avoid edit warring, please provide any reason this should be excluded. 20WattSphere (talk) 02:14, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not removed his factional alignment from the article at all – it is included in the fourth paragraph of the lede and in the #Political positions section. I was actually the editor that added reference to his factional alignment in the first place. I reverted Wistherdisc's edits because it refers to Dutton as leader of a "far right" faction, which I don't believe is accurate (and was not mentioned in the source provided). This was accompanied by references to Dutton being nicknamed "Potato" and "Voldemort", and to him being untrustworthy; these do not seem like good-faith or WP:NPOV edits. I do object to Dutton's faction being mentioned in the first sentences of the article – I'm not aware of any other articles on Australian politicians that do this, even in the ALP where factions are much more well defined. It's given due weight in its current location in the article.

So this is a very different reason. Your edit summaries suggested you didn't trust the sources.

Mentioning a politician's relative position in the party seems lede-worthy to me, to put their actions into context. I thought this was the case for most Aus politicians but I've had a quick look and it's only some, e.g. Bill Shorten, Tanya Plibersek, Chris Bowen. Granted, they're ALP, but I don't think what party you're in contradicts the principle that it's useful for readers to know upfront where a politician stands.

I've surveyed about 5 sources for the National Right. All of them refer to the party being the furthest right in the party - "hard right" is generally used rather than "far right". Why can't we just link the faction?

On being untrustworthy - I see you removed a poll indicating he wasn't trusted by the public. I think this is worth including, especially if it spurred a media conversation. The more information the better in my view. 20WattSphere (talk) 10:24, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]