Talk:Hugh McDermott (politician)

Room for improvement
Every parliamentarian or government figure on earth has controversial moments. But I've noticed that the best articles in wikipedia don't have "Controversy" sections. (For example, the Julia Gillard article is excellent, and there were plenty of controversial points in that particular career story, but there's no "Controversies" section in the piece.) They treat the controversies as part of the unfolding biography, so a sentence here and a sentence there, as per the chronology. My view is that's how it should be done on this BLP. Also, when someone is accused of something, then found by whatever the relevant legal process is to be cleared, then it seems odd to me for there to be 200 words on the whole thing just to find that the accusation didn't stack up. All the more so if the original accusation is something reported by a defunct blog news site. MatthewDalhousie (talk) 02:54, 10 January 2024 (UTC)