FWIW, I'm going to unprotect that page and let the author contribute to it. I only ask the contributor to cite their sources. They should also be aware that I'll be able to verify this information if I do a quick trip to the State Library of New South Wales.
Ta bu shi da yu
Skyring wrote:
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 05:43:26 -0700, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
I would just wait for him to return from vacation. While seniority does not exist on Wikipedia officially, in practice it does and certain editors such as Adam Carr have a degree of favor. Other mechanisms for solving the problem such as negotiating with him or mediating will also require his presence.
Adam may be on holiday, but he has made several changes to the article and the discussion page, where he states that he "can't check his references" at the moment. One might ask why he feels he is able to revert my edits, which I have backed up by some authoritative and readily available texts on the matter, if he is without access to reference material.
In any case, he is flat out wrong on several points. No appeal to seniority or rankism can justify a stubborn insistence on untruths.
Gough Whitlam and the events of the 1975 dismissal are well enough known that I can be sure that there are other editors available who are supplied with the standard texts, such as Paul Kelly's definitive text "November 1975".