Talk:Stephen Franks

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.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

New Zealand: Politics Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the New Zealand politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

Updating

I am new to Wikipedia so I apologise in advance if I have broken any conventions. I have just updated and condensed elements of this article to take account of changing events. --Taikorea (talk) 10:01, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Motivations[edit]

I am removing the reference to the EFA as the reason for returning to poltics, it is not accurate and furthermore, it is not supported by the reference provided.

--Wchambers (talk) 09:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)Wchambers--Wchambers (talk) 09:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. Franks states:

"Yet in Parliament, out of the sun and light, the iniquitous Electoral Finance Bill was being forced through. I can’t just put aside the corruption by power of those now running this country."

That's a very clear statement that Franks' candidacy was motivated by his opposition to the EFA. --Lholden (talk) 21:47, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I still think it ought to be ommitted for now, because while it may have been a motivation, the source does not state that it was the motivation. Further, I think that consistency is very important and no other candidates articles go into this kind of detail to opine on the motivations of the candidate. --Wchambers (talk) 11:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't have to be 'the' motivation - the article doesn't state that. If no other candidates articles have this sort of detail, then maybe they should. There's no good reason to exclude relevant, referenced information on the basis the such information isn't on other articles. --Lholden (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should John Key's page state that the motivation for his candidacy is that he wants to be prime minister? The simple fact is that there is no need to contain such subjective information in the biography of a person who is at this stage only running for Parliament.Furthermore, the citation is the personal blog of the candidate, not a third party as mandated by Wikipedia:Reliable sources, it is your interpretation of a primary source and therefore violates Wikipedia:No original research. Because it was written by the subject on a matter directly related to the subject and therefore breachs WP:SELFPUB and WP: BLP. In all of this the burden of proof is on he who seeks to add or restore. The case for keeping this simply is not made out. Just think, Abraham Lincoln does not talk about Licoln's motivation for getting into politics, though he is much more notable, is dead and has lots of secondary sources which have regard to the matter. Please do not add it unless you can find a reliable, third party secondary source not published by the subject.--Wchambers (talk) 21:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence was not my interpretation of the source. It was a pre-existing statement which I merely re-added to the article. I agree on the third-party source information, although I'm sure I can find one (Franks was featured in The Dominion Post with his mouth taped-up stating the same). Nonetheless, I'm not going to re-add the sentence again, this is a minor issue. --Lholden (talk) 23:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]