Jump to content

Talk:Barnaby Joyce

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Weird citation

[edit]

This citation doesn't seem relevant:

After graduating, Joyce moved around northern New South Wales and Queensland as a farm worker, nightclub bouncer, and banker.[1]

Jack Upland (talk) 00:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Barker, Garry (14 February 2007). "Telstra to make Next G biggest, fastest in world". Melbourne: The Age. Archived from the original on 15 November 2013.

Removing all New Zealand categories

[edit]

Barnaby Joyce never held New Zealand citizenship. The courts ruled him invalid to hold office because he was eligible to hold New Zealand citizenship--Soft and Stout (talk) 11:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Political positions - Subcategories

[edit]

Are subcategories for every individual belief necessary, given some of them (like the burqa ban) are single-line? The larger categories 'Social/Environmental/Economic Issues' seem enough, and if it's too long maybe it needs to be shortened rather than have sub-subcategories added LittleShostyBoy (talk) 03:15, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is an overwhelming amount of information outlined in his policy positions, but most of that information is well-sourced and thus doesn't need to be deleted. I think the subheadings are very helpful because otherwise content would not be organised in a clean and orderly manner, additionally they're useful for navigating quickly and easily via the table of contents. American politicians like Zohran Mamdani do have highly detailed policy position sections on their articles so I appreciate an Australian politician getting the same treatment. Qwerty123M (talk) 04:42, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on the sourcing and the detail, I just think it may be too much on some issues, like the burqa as listed. I personally think the same is true for sections of Mamdani's positions, such as "Iran-Israel War" among others are also putting too much detail. Maybe something neater, while keeping necessary detail, would be
[main subheading] Economic policy
[in paragraph text] populist agenda/banking royal commission (since they are one para each)
[sub-subheading] Foreign investment in Australia (as it has a lot more detail than the other two)
I think economic may be more deserving, but subheadings for 7-word sentences feels a bit overkill, when it can be communicated in a similar and less cluttered way by bundling small bits of information together, without deleting any of the information that is in there (which I agree, it's not something that needs to/should be deleted) LittleShostyBoy (talk) 04:49, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]