Talk:David Southwick
 | This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was delete. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Degree controversy edit
There seems to be a disagreement about whether this text should be added. It may well constitute undue weight. Please discuss it here before re-inserting the material, and please assume good faith - the sort of claims made in edit summaries about other editors are serious accusations that need serious evidence. StAnselm (talk) 09:26, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I believe this matter meets the test for due weight.
The two daily newspapers in Melbourne, The Age and the Herald Sun, have run the story prominently. (See for example: Liberal MP David Southwick defends false qualifications in official biography: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/liberal-mp-david-southwick-defends-false-qualifications-in-official-biography/story-e6frf7kx-1226517696924; MP sorry for padding his resume: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/mp-sorry-for-padding-his-resume-20121116-29hop.html)
Public condemnation of Southwick for falsifying his qualifications is not politically motivated, and he has faced negative commentary by commentators of both the left and right of the political spectrum. (See for example Andrew Bolt (probably Australia’s most prominent right wing commentator) at http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/one_more_reason_to_think_politics_today_is_a_circus/ and Derryn Hinch at http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/blog-with-derryn-hinch/remember-the-name-david-southwick/20121116-29h2b.html)
The issue has received significant national attention, with the stories also running in national and newspapers in other states of Australia. (See for example: The Daily Telegraph, Sydney: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/liberal-mp-david-southwick-defends-false-qualifications-in-official-biography/story-e6freuy9-1226517696924) The matter featured prominently on radio and television, including ABC Radio and 3AW (including Neil Mitchell and Derryn Hinch) and every television network in Melbourne. The Premier of Victoria was questioned about it on the ABC, Australia’s national broadcast network, as part of the 7.30 Report. The Minister for Education has been asked to refer the matter of fraud of academic qualifications to parliament’s Education and Training Committee.
The matter has moved beyond a single incident and now forms part of the general commentary and public persona about Southwick (although general commentary about him is limited because he is a minor political with very limited public profile outside this scandal). (See for example: http://www.theage.com.au/national/melbourne-life/southwick-spun-a-tune-as-dj-20121119-29m5x.html and Israel ‘has the right’ to defend itself: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/israel-has-the-right-to-defend-itself-20121118-29kd7.html)
Mr Southwick has admitted he falsified his qualifications in relation to this matter, in his media statement in relation to this issue (which regrettably does not appear on his website). Some more balance to this entry could potentially be added by linking to his media statement if it was available on either Mr Southwick’s website or that of the Liberal Party of Victoria. This statement acknowledges that Mr Southwick does not have the qualifications he claimed and apologises for claiming them.
I am happy to consider alternative points of view though! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.144.75.247 (talk) 13:21, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
Are there any other contributions? It seems to me that there are a few people monitoring this in favour of inclusion and one user (NoBingo) against inclusion on the basis that it is a 'minor unimportant issue', but no one else contributing here. There are significant verifiable evidence about this matter, and this matter is the most notable thing about him. If this incident doesn't warrant inclusion on his page, I am not certain he warrants a page at all and I would suggest we start a deletion discussion instead. Any other views at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.144.75.247 (talk) 13:35, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion edit
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
