Talk:Dennis Stevenson
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Khazar2 in topic removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
| 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}
Point of view
editThe langauge used is unbalanced. In particular his odd-ball ideas could not possibly be described as socialist.--Grahame (talk) 08:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
- I've removed that particular sentence - it was complete POV. Unfortunately there's almost nothing reliable on Stevenson out there - it does seem that he was a bit of a weird guy, but the best I can find is a speech from Craig Duby claiming that he was an avowed supporter of the Citizens Electoral Council. A few other non-reliable sources mention this, but I can't find something definite. Frickeg (talk) 08:57, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- He had some far-right views (League of Rights-ish, if I recall) and at one point, if I recall rightly, was living in his office. I'm sure the Canberra Times covered it at some point. Rebecca (talk) 10:12, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
editI've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
- This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
- There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
- It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
- In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
- This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)