Talk:Faceless men

	Australia portal Faceless men 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.
	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.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

addition[edit]

After reading that the now deceased friendship/cooperation between Michael Kroger (former Liberal Party President) and Peter Costello (former Australian Treasurer) has impacted significantly on Australian politics in the last 25 years (i.e. between 1987 and 2012), Kroger should be included as a faceless man. The definition is, so I think, a person who exercises influence as a half insider without holding a political mandate, and not visible to the naked eye of the electorate. One used to call that eminences grises, but whether you call it that or faceless men, Kroger fits into that category. 144.136.192.6 (talk) 01:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You will have to find a source which uses the term "faceless man" in reference to him. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 09:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References for Kroger as "faceless" appear lacking. Rangasyd (talk) 06:49, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Q: When is a reference not a reference?[edit]

A: When it is used to introduce a comment on the content. Ref #10 currently reads as: (Mahoney repeats here the common error that Alan Reid and Menzies referred to the ALP Fedetral Executive as "faceless men". In fact it was the Federal Conference.) While it is a link to the source, the text of the link is being used as an extended [sic]-note. The point that it makes it worth making, but should be either included in the text or in a seperate "Note". (And the typo "Fedetral" for Federal can be fixed at the same time.) Wayne 19:42, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: In the absence of objections I've fixed this. (Without changing the content other than the link.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wayne aus (talk • contribs) 19:32, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]