Talk:Christine Nixon

167.181.12.15 (talk) Hello. You should change the first sentence. By starting it with "was" it makes it seem like she's dead. You should say she "is" and "served" as commissioner in the past, instead of saying she "was the commissioner", which reads as if she died or is dead.

-Gregg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.181.12.15 (talk) 15:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Untitled

NOTE: I am a regular researcher, but rarely EDIT on Wikipedia. But I'd like it noted to the Authors of Christine Nixon's page, that there is no mention of her being either instrumental, in charge of, part of the success, or whatever the case may be, of Task Force Purana, instrumental in the Melbourne Gangland saga? I feel that this, surely, is quite a major part of her Police history, and that some mention should/could possibly be added in this Wikipedia entry. Cheers, KaneTW, 28/04/10 KaneTW (talk) 18:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Rather unkindly, she is known in some corners of the force as "Shrek" or "Big Kev" --Commking 06:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Chief Commissioner

This section after the first paragraph is complete opinion without basis. There are stat's quoted without citations, opinions of the force without quotations nor citations, as well as tabloid style claims.

I was going to start adding citation needed and disputed tags, but it would have encompassed the whole section.

Any suggestions on a direction? Should the current section be cleaned-up/cited, removed, or completely written?Whippen (talk) 13:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

It needs to be entirely re-written. This is more like a fan page than a factual page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.166.123 (talk) 10:25, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree with the above mentioned. In the light of recent news, this article needs to be rewritten throttler (talk) 01:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Black Saturday Royal Commission

On Wednesday the 7th of April 2010, Christine Nixon appeared before the Victoria Bushfire Royal Commission. Christine Nixon gave evidence in regard to her actions as Chief Commissioner of The Victoria Police Force at the time of the catastrophic Black Saturday Bush Fires that ocurred on the 7th of February 2009. During this hearing Nixon testified that she left the State Emergency Command Centre at 6.00 p.m. on Black Saturday a shport time after being advised of the likliehood of significant loss of life as a result of the bush fires. Nixon stated that after leaving the centre she went home and got something to eat. After further investigation of her claims Nixon admitted having gone out to a prior arranged dinner date with her husband and another couple. Nixon subsequently came under sever criticism in the media on the 8th and 9th of April 2010 after these revelations surfaced. Nixon refused to resign from her current position as head of the Bushfire Recovery Authority despite many calls for her to do so. At this time many commentators including 3AW presenter Neil Mitchell, Former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett and many others demanding she be sacked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.38.238 (talk) 07:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

If there really were "many commentators" I suggest you find less biased ones than Mitchell and Kennett to quote. Sorry, that sounds a little rude, but given the comments above alleging bias in the article, I think we have to find very objective sources now. I've heard a huge range of opinions on what Nixon did on Black Saturday. Not sure how it could be reflected in the article. I believe she has been asked to attend the commission again. It may be safest to wait until something substantial comes from the commission itself before trying to put this in the article. HiLo48 (talk) 04:10, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Two editors have now tried to add some poorly written and unbalanced comments on these events. I have reverted twice and we may soon reach a potential 3RR situation. It IS current and it IS controversial. The media and some politicians are making a meal of it. Some are saying we don't have a problem and that Nixon's presence would have made no difference. The preceding two sentences describes what to me is notable about this story so far. Again, I say that what will be notable in the long term is what the Royal Commission itself makes of Nixon's actions. HiLo48 (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Recipients of the Australian Police Medal

Please add category Category:Recipients of the Australian Police Medal Jherschel (talk) 12:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Herald Sun potential bias of Los Angeles trip

I don't have editing powers, but I think that the "Criticism" section should include a reference to the original "Beverly Hills Cop" front page story from the Herald Sun, and could be expanded to include media coverage of the journalism behind the story. Some websites:

• http://www.theage.com.au/business/media-and-marketing/blunden-clashed-with-guthrie-over-nixon-coverage-20100429-tuc0.html
• http://www.theage.com.au/national/beverly-hills-cop-out-boss-also-had-jumbo-joyride-20100429-twlu.html
• http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/04/27/news-v-guthrie-nixon-murdoch-calvert-jones-and-other-dirty-linen/
• http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/12/09/was-the-police-commissioner-the-key-to-editor-guthries-removal/

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Frozball (talk • contribs) 10:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

other positions

Mrs Nixon is no longer on the Fosters board. See: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/christine-nixon-cites-difficult-time-as-she-quits-board-of-fosters/story-e6frg9h6-1225907855704 please edit (no acc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.28.248.170 (talk) 04:33, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

POV - weight

The following statement appears to be a source of debate - "As a large woman, Nixon's size has received disproportionate emphasis in the media." This is not a neutral point of view - this is taking a side in a debate. The use of the subjective words large and disproportionate are not appropriate unless it is clear who is making these claims. Hack (talk) 04:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

There are two sources. Both make the point that the criticism is irrelevant and unfair. I said this in an Edit summary! Twice! That you come here acting all innocent and ignorant is NOT showing good faith. As I ALSO said in an Edit summary, find a reliable source saying it's OK to criticise her performance as Police Commissioner because she is fat, and maybe then you can add that to the article. HiLo48 (talk) 05:17, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Whatever your view on the media coverage, the suggestion that it is disproportionate is a subjective judgment and is not impartial under the WP:POV guidelines. It needs to made clear that this is the view of the writers of the two opinion pieces used as sources. As an aside, using disproportionate in this context suggests that there might be a reasonable level of discussion on a public figure's weight. Hack (talk) 05:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

This is a very difficult area. A huge part of the Nixon story now is the criticism of her in the tabloid media (radio, TV, blogs and print) for things that calmer sections of the media (and the population) think are totally irrelevant and unreasonable. I don't know how we properly reflect that in the article. Using the media as general sources is not practical, because media behaviour is the story. But those two seemingly well chosen sources do summarise the problem well. To aim for some sort of artificial "balance" here means accepting the possibility that the shock jock perspective has even the smallest amount of merit, and it doesn't. One important thing though, this item should not be under the heading Health. That in itself is a very loaded choice. HiLo48 (talk) 08:09, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Christine Nixon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070831024411/http://monash.edu.au/news/newsline/story/366 to http://www.monash.edu.au/news/newsline/story/366

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:20, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Christine Nixon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100121063828/http://www.wewillrebuild.vic.gov.au/about-us/56.html to http://www.wewillrebuild.vic.gov.au/about-us/56.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706125440/http://www.onsidevictoria.org.au/default.asp?id=6 to http://www.onsidevictoria.org.au/default.asp?id=6
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100405220150/http://www.phoenixclub.org.au/page33.php to http://www.phoenixclub.org.au/page33.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)