Talk:Australian Military Court

Specifics from case
Mindful of WP:BLP, I would be a little less specific in the details relating the teabagging case. I would consider removing the name of the alleged offender and the specifics of the alleged assault. This information is not necessary to make the point, or relevant to the high court decision and could be removed without lessening the encyclopedic value of  the article. I am aware the information is available elsewhere but newspapers etc. have a different criteria for publishing than we do. Thoughts? -- Mattinbgn\talk 06:46, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Mmm, I take your point, and I agree the article would probably not be any the less for reference to "a former RAN sailor" rather than naming the alleged offender as the article is focused on the AMC not the court case or the event. The only reason I would prefer the details of the "teabagging" case to stay is because of the hook in my WP:DYK nomination! Seriously, however, the same rationale applies, I agree. --Canley (talk) 07:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)