Talk:Peter Butt

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.

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers

	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 WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Poisoning the well

Kareneski inserted the text "made by members of the nuclear establishment" into the sentence "The complaint was rejected although the panel did find that the documentary was not balanced." This very much smacks of poisoning the well: suggesting that there was something dastardly about about even raising the complaint, because of course that weasly nuclear establishment would do nothing but lie. In fact, the complaint was raised by one person (Dr. Tony Woods), not "members". And while Dr. Woods is a qualified nuclear engineer and a former engineering manager at ANSTO, he is very far from being a member of the "nuclear establishment" (which hardly even exists in Australia.) Rather, he has not worked there for years and is now a frequent and strong critic of ANSTO, and widely and favourably quoted by environmental activists.

I also added the word "alleged" to Kareneski's parenthetical "about Australia's attempts to acquire nuclear weapons". Allegations that Australia attempted to acquire a nuclear arsenal are very controversial, and citing them without a qualifier such as "alleged" are therefore biased. -- Securiger (talk) 06:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]