Talk:Alexander Voltz

Edit conflict regarding Voltz' views on the colonisation of Australia

On 8 October, Sky News Australia published this opinion piece by Voltz, outlining his views on the colonisation of Australia.

It has the byline: "The argument that colonisation was detrimental to Aboriginals is simply not true given it brought with it feats like medicine, education, writes Alexander Voltz." In the piece, Voltz describes government policy towards Aboriginal people as generally benevolent even from the earliest colonial times, extols the positives of colonisation, that the government is largely not responsible for any negatives of colonisation, and that where frontier violence occurred, it was usually due to provocation by Indigenous people.

The broader context of Voltz' piece is a recent speech by Senator Jacinta Price (NT) in which she said that colonisation has no ongoing negative effects on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

I accept my initial edit to include these views in the politics section of the article violated the BLP policy for tone.

The edit was undone by User:Jagledder (Special:contributions/Jagledder), a brand new account which has only edited this article. They falsely claimed the information was wholly untrue.

It was then reinstated by User:Mox Eden.

This was reverted by User:E2452458 (Special:contributions/E2452458), a 5-month-old account created in May 2023 with no user page, no talk page (until 9 Oct 2023) and whose only contributions are to the Alexander Voltz article. On User talk:E2452458 the user says the information is wholly untrue and that my edit was griefing (vandalism).

It was reinstated by User:Materialscientist.

Then undone once again by User:E2452458.

I responded by rewording to the following:

Voltz has written that during the [[colonisation of Australia]], the Crown (the governing authorities) were generally benevolent, tolerant and lenient towards [[Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander]] people. Voltz states that where [[Australian Frontier Wars|violence]] did occur, it was mostly as a result of provocation by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Voltz argues that colonisation was overall beneficial to First Nations Australians, because it eventually introduced advancements such as modern medicine, alcoholic beverages, and writing.

I felt this was a fairer account of Voltz' views which he himself makes clear in the Sky News piece. I reiterate: these are Voltz' own views which he has voluntarily published in a mainstream media outlet.

This was again undone by User:E2452458. The user has added a small line (which lacks a citation) about Voltz' views, stating that this a compromise, and threatened to contact administrators if the conflict goes further. I have contacted the user for comment. Revoran (talk) 07:41, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Small correction: The user's compromise sentence was in fact cited. Revoran (talk) 07:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation to comment, Revoran. I am satisfied with the small line about colonisation, which adequately reflects what the page subject has written for a mainstream news outlet. The page subject, however, has written extensively on Australia's Voice to Parliament referendum, far more than he has on colonisation. The current acknowledgement is accurate and appropriate within the context of the page, captures Revoran's neutral intentions, and accords well with Wikipedia's BLP guidelines, namely 'tone' and 'balance'. E2452458 (talk) 08:57, 17 October 2023 (UTC)