Talk:WA Inc

earlier comments
Great work, Ian. Wouldn't it be better located at WA Inc? Snottygobble | Talk 22:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * You read my mind. It was on my list of things to do today.  Moving. -- &mdash;Moondyne 00:49, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

No David Parker link
I removed the link to David Parker as it leads to a list of other David Parkers but not one of this particular David Parker. --The Shadow Treasurer (talk) 04:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmphh, we'd better fix that. Wikipedia is the poorer for lack of an article on the ministerial purloiner who (at his trial, I think) proclaimed 'concealment' as a necessary technique for politicians. Meantime, he should at least be redlinked. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 08:44, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Lost Hansard link
The state's parliamentary website has been updated with the loss of Hon Norman Moore, Royal commission review&mdash;remarks in Legislative Council. I have removed that from External links but am enquiring about how to retrieve this and other historic Hansard content. They can't just write off the past. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 03:45, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Paddy O'Brien
Whoever created the redlink to Paddy O'Brien, I'm interested in creating the page that it links to. I'v been an exile from WA for a long time since WA Inc. Can you help me fill in the bio details? -- Peter S Strempel Page &#124; Talk 08:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

A draft stub article on Patrick John (Paddy) O'Brien can be found under my user page at my user draft page. Please comment and help out within seven days, whereafter I will publish the page as it then exists.

Peter S Strempel Page &#124; Talk 07:47, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Page for Patrick John (Paddy) O'Brien created today, and redlink from this page now changed to bluelink.

Peter S Strempel Page &#124; Talk 09:50, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Tony Barrass citation
I strongly object to this deletion and edit summary which unjustly impugns the integrity of one of WA's most senior and respected journalists, Tony Barrass. I cannot see any objective justification for removing a reputably published report of a section of the royal commission proceedings. I have added the citation to John Curtin Foundation and will be very critical if the same unargued treatment is given to that content. I consider the quote to be absolutely essential to an understanding of how the Curtin Foundation (and WA Inc) worked. Tony Barrass has the best possible credentials for verifiability and should not be impugned without a more detailed statement of reasons. Rather than reinstate the content at this time, I shall first try to satisfy Moondyne's requirements by searching the commission papers for the transcript of Connell's evidence for reinclusion in WA Inc (in greater detail if possible). Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 14:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry if you thought I was impugning the journalist. The way this was presented&mdash;with a blockquote preceded by [In evidence to the Commission] implies the whole contents of the blockquote was evidence.  It was grossly misleading and needs to be presented in a better form. Moondyne (talk) 15:55, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Point taken, but total removal was not the appropriate edit. Will look again. Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 01:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Ray O'Conner, Peter Dowding
The way the intro reads is a bit confusing as it doesn't mention Ray O'Conner or Peter Dowding, then right at the end we see that Ray O'Conner went to jail so he must have been important. Maybe the intro should list all the premiers involved from start to finish. The words "much of the period" are a bit vague.121.91.55.85 (talk) 10:00, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * O'Connor's crime wasn't directly WA Inc related - except that the royal commission happened to uncover his stealing of a cheque from Bond during the WA Inc era. The article says that. It would be a misrepresentation to add his name into the lead. Moondyne (talk) 14:52, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Read all about it in the WA Inc Royal Commission Report, Vol.VI, pages (pdf) 132-152. True to type, Rocky was after pocketing the cash to "buy" Stirling Council's approval for Observation City. The deal was too tricky for the Commission to accept that corruption could be demonstrated on the part of the councillors. However, there is no question that he himself was up to his ears in the WA Inc manipulations of Bond Corporation, the Burkes and co. Very interesting reading! Bjenks (talk) 08:45, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * He probably thought what are the chances I'll get caught pinching bribe money! A fascinating sub-plot. I never quite understand how you could get done for stealing something that was illegal to start with. And after all that, Obs City went ahead anyway.  I recall he always maintained his innocence.  On reflection, I'm not fussed if he gets promoted into the lead. Cheers.  Moondyne (talk) 10:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)