Talk:David Garrett (politician)

Achievements
There must be some achievements as an MP that we can set against the long list of controversies. dramatic (talk) 02:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that his followers would regard his 3-strikes bill as an achievement. Maybe somebody could add this (it would help if one believed in that measure being an achievement, though, as it very much depends on your world view).  Schwede 66  04:36, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've now added an achievements section.  Schwede 66  01:05, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * In answer to the primary question, that's because they are few and far between. Thanks. 125.239.117.102 (talk) 04:24, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

'Young Nick' during the Cook Bicentennial Year
Hello Pgm13, given your recent edit, it's no wonder that your latest edit ('Young Nick' during the Cook Bicentennial Year) got reverted. It will probably not be accepted, unless you provide a source for this. So I shall remove this again, but you are more than welcome to put it back on if you can provide a reference that backs this up.  Schwede 66  06:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Controversies
Is it controversial - or derogatory - to state that "paedophilia was a sexual orientation which could not be altered, just like homosexuality"?124.197.15.138 (talk) 02:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

/* Controversies */ Removed per [WP:BLP]
I have removed material from that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.

The entire section was written as a beat-up by editors who disagree with the subject politically. It needs a complete cull and rewrite in a neutral manner. Vividuppers (talk) 12:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Edits / Refs
I've done some general tidying up of the article - as well as putting in tags for refs. Since this is a BLP and deals with some potentially sensitive topics we need to ensure if material is going to stay up here it is backed by solid refs. Clarke43 (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2013 (UTC)