Talk:Jackie Trad

Non-neutral tone of some sections of the article
I feel that several parts of this article do not read neutrally. The description of legislation (in perhaps excessive detail) is written in an overly positive light. For example the simple mention of a budget - something every government has to pass - is expanded into unnecessary detail and mentions of how much debt was reduced, and how much the surplus had increased.

Another example is describing government expenditures alongside their intended outcomes, rather than aiming for those intended outcomes. For example, an expenditure "to help Queensland achieve its 50 per cent renewable energy target". This comes across as overly promotional. Happy to hear the views of other editors. 200.118.112.139 (talk) 05:01, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

The mention of budget surpluses and debt is not unnecessary when describing budgets introduced by the subject of the article, when they were in the position of Treasurer of Queensland. Happy to see other points of view included in these sections, especially in terms of the budgets' reception by the public and official opposition responses, however the inclusion of budget statistics and key points is in line with other articles of treasurers of states of Australia, and the Treasurer of Australia. Stating budget measurers, and the intended effects of specific measures is not by itself non-neutral and unnecessarily detailed. --ChastityArgyle (talk) 06:49, 30 October 2020 (UTC)