Talk:Raff Ciccone

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:51, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Australian Senator Raffaele "Raff" Ciccone.png

Please do not vandalise this page as you have done other pages.
This is a biography of a living person. The person is notable because they are serving as an elected official in parliament. Please do not remove elements that come from reliable sources that help the reader to understand who the person is.The Little Platoon (talk) 22:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

this is your second warning. If you have ideas to improve the article bring them to this talk page. Thank you.


 * Regardless of who is correct here, this is clearly not vandalism. As it happens I think Onetwothreeip is correct that their version (at least of the family stuff) is more encyclopedic in tone. If we must have mention of his brother, it would be better to say that he was "one of two children" or "has a younger/older brother". The fluff line about a loving family home is totally unnecessary. The hawkish/assertiveness thing is more borderline; I think either is acceptable as both terms are used in the source. Frickeg (talk) 07:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * For your own sake, understand Vandalism, and withdraw that comment. I don't care if you apologise or not, but if you want your contributions to be valued by the community, it would be in your interests not to accuse others of vandalism when it's clearly not. You should also message me directly on my user talk page if you have to speak to me directly.
 * On the first part, Wikipedia is simply not a magazine and it is not our role to humanise or sympathise with article subjects. On the second part, I chose to use the language directly from the source as discourse around things like "hawkishness" and implications of that language can be contentious and ill-defined. Onetwothreeip (talk) 08:41, 1 December 2020 (UTC)


 * You know what I do apologise. I'm big enough to do that. It was an overstatement to call your removal of content from this article vandalism. The Little Platoon (talk) 09:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Great to hear. Would you like to address what myself and Frickeg have said? Onetwothreeip (talk) 23:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

First I have apologised. Easy to do. The Little Platoon (talk) 00:34, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Second I have changed the language around family of origin, as you have both suggested. The Little Platoon (talk) 00:34, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Third, about hawkishness, it is an easy to understand term, and the subject is placed in that cluster people in Parliament by the cited article. I'm going to do some more thinking on this. The Little Platoon (talk) 00:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Fourth, I profoundly disagree that a BLP shouldn't give a sense of someone's life or personality or beliefs or convictions. I can make a case using Good Articles and examples from encyclopaedia entries outside of Wikipedia. However, I think we simply see things very differently and we are not going to agree. The Little Platoon (talk) 00:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Fifthly, I find it notable that, Wikipedia discourages editors from tracking other editors and changing this particular articles. I sincerely hope that's not what is happening here. The Little Platoon (talk) 00:42, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Back to point number three. The group the subject has been connected to has been described as hawkish by a reliable source, and that has now been cited. The Little Platoon (talk) 01:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)