Talk:2024 Australian federal budget

Stephen Koukoulas on the budget's political impact

Hi @Skyring - just hoping to review the quote from Stephen Koukoulas in Independent Australia that you removed. After looking at some previous discussions about the reliability of IA, I agree that by itself it would fail to meet WP:RS standards. I do however feel as though this specific quote from Koukoulas is worthy for inclusion - Koukoulas is an extremely prominent economist and has previously been the Chief Economist at Citibank, Economics Advisor to the Jillard government and Chief Advisor Financial Markets at the Department of the Treausry. He also has been a frequent author for both the ABC and Guardian, which are RS. I would like to include the direct quote from him, presented as such. I'm happy to work with you to find other perspectives to ensure WP:BALANCE. Tim (Talk) 11:14, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

IA rarely produces any independent content, preferring to lift material from other sources. Find one of those. If the source is any good it shouldn't be too hard. --Pete (talk) 00:49, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Skyring - apologies if this was lost in my writing, but I want to clarify the content that I am proposing is not general editorial from IA but rather a direct quote from an extremely authoritative expert who just happens to have included it in their contribution to IA. As with my original edit, I am more than happy to work together to make sure that the surrounding context is fairly represented. I think it's also worth noting that upon further checking, the only RSN discussion about IA was over 4 years ago and was initiated and heavily pushed by yourself with only couple others editors making comments and no real consensus. Plus, a recent (late 2023) audit on Media Bias Fact Check rated it with a left-centre political biases (which it openly admits, describing itself as progressive) but also high factuality so I am hesitant to take the claims as gospel. Tim (Talk) 11:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

If the quote is from an expert then find another source other than IA. This is a political opinion blog and they have some very questionable journalistic practices in their past. I couldn't give a rat's arse about their political leanings. Use the ABC or The Guardian, both widely acknowledged as left-leaning, or some other reliable source. We use NPOV to cover all views but something coming from a fringey blog is poor practice if we can find a more reliable and authoritative source.

I cannot imagine that a respected economist would confine their observations about an important subject to an online political blog. If the guy is prominent and respected he must surely have expressed opinions about the budget elsewhere. --Pete (talk) 02:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Again, you have made some very broad assertions and assumptions here about the source without consensus and despite the recent review by Media Bias Fact Check which is to the contrary. The reference that I provided was not an "opinion blog", and repeated, dramatic assertions of the like or it being a "fringey blog" are again without basis. Tim (Talk) 12:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I disagree with your assessment. Discussion re IA goes back some years and there is certainly no consensus that it is a reliable source. If you disagree, we can reopen the discussion on RSN but right now I say again, if a source is good, respected, and notable, then their comments, statements and opinions will surely be found in sources agreed by consensus in Wikipedia to be reliable. If something appears solely on IA then by that very characteristic it is unlikely to be accurate or notable.

I do not appreciate your stalking and badgering me. Please stay off my talk page and if you have any further concerns about my conduct as an editor, I suggest you take them up in an appropriate forum. My contributions nowadays are more in the wikignome area. I like to tidy up little irregularities in articles and I'm sorry if this upsets you but there it is. --Pete (talk) 11:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)