Talk:Barilaro v Shanks-Markovina

Jury trial

I think it should be pointed out that jury trials in the FCA are rare as hen's teeth. But I can't work out how to put this in the article without being accused of WP:OR.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Fix up

I'm looking to address the issues presently listed at the top of the article. I have questions and proposed solutions to each.

1. The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for events.
It is my understanding that this is and/or is likly to be an "event that is a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance is likely to be notable" as imagined by WP:Lasting. There are a few "something else['s]" that come to mind. The Deputy Premier of New South Wales resigning not only that role but as an MP citing this case as a reason. Him resigning causes a by election, events previous of which seem to pass notability. It is also of at least national interest, i.e. beyond "a local area" per WP:GEOSCOPE, and in my estimation is likely to have a "demonstrable long-term impact on a significant region of the world or a significant widespread societal group". It may be hyperbolic of me on this point but I am honestly wondering whether, if the case goes Barilaro's way, there will be some chilling effect on sites like Wikipedia. I would hope not but still.
There may be an issue with the diversity of sources. I think this is best addressed below.

2. This article may be too technical for most readers to understand.
I'll accept that. Good chunks will need to be rewritten in less technical more accessible form.

3. This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may interest only a particular audience.
This can be addressed with the technical issue above.

4. The examples and perspective in this article or section might have an extensive bias or disproportional coverage towards one or more specific regions.
I'll need someone to explain how this one applies to this article specifically.

5. This article relies too much on references to primary sources.
This issue stems from contributors, mainly myself, not wanting to be pinged for contempt of court. I may be being too cautious on that but that is what is informing the direct use of judgements and orders. I suppose this is also a WP:DIVERSE issue. I'm sure further secondary sources can be found to reduce reliance on primary source.

Looking forward to further input. --RockerballAustralia (talk) 00:14, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Is there any evidence that Barilaro resigned because of this court case?--Jack Upland (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

"Mr Barilaro said Ms Berejiklian's resignation had nothing to do with his exit but his legal proceedings against YouTuber Jordan Shanks, were a "big reason" for making the call". Burrobert (talk) 01:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

References

This source about 22 paragraphs in, from where it says 'Mr Barilaro said Ms Berejiklian's resignation had nothing to do with his exit but his legal proceedings against YouTuber Jordan Shanks, were a "big reason" for making the call.' There's a few paragraphs there talking about the case in relation to his resignation. The accompanying video gives a brief mention at well.

There's also this source, 11 paragraphs in from where it says 'He said he had decided to go after 10 and a half years in politics, citing the toll a defamation action had taken.' --RockerballAustralia (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you to those who have taken interest in improving the article quality. I still maintain the article would be best served if merged/moved to a section on Barilaro's page, but I am willing to wait to see how the article improves. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 09:34, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Firstly, we need to know what ends up happening with the case. Then, if it turns out to be a minor event, the question is whether it should be merged to John Barilaro or Friendlyjordies. And, by the way, I don't think anyone is going to be charged with contempt of court for repeating news reports of the case. If Barilaro resigned because of this case, why is this not in the article?--Jack Upland (talk) 07:26, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

As this is an on going case we probably won't know what will ultimately end up happening for some time – April if it goes all the way, November if mediation is successful. Contempt of court would come up if we repeated something that wasn't allowed to be made public. Very unlikely I agree but news outlets have done exactly that in the past and I tend not to take those chances. As for Barilaro resigning because of this case, it is in this article. The line is "Barilaro resigned as Deputy Premier of New South Wales and as member for Monaro in October 2021 citing this case as one of the reasons for his resignation." It's two lines above the parties section. --RockerballAustralia (talk) 07:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

OK. I think we will need to see what happens, and that may be till next year...--Jack Upland (talk) 21:29, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Merge to Friendlyjordies

--Jack Upland (talk) 03:32, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Possibly useful: How to propose a merger. ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 04:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)