Talk:Kristina Keneally/Archive 1

Archive 1

Off topic

I've removed the following not because it is or isn't true, but because it is off topic. It's worth a mention, but that's all. Regards, Ben Aveling 22:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Faced strong opposition from the community about her support of the NSW government's proposal to expand Port Botany by creating a 60 ha third terminal by dredging 7.5 million cubic metres of Botany Bay seabed that will have a major impact on the Bay's ecology and surrounding environment. The Iemma Government approved the expansion and has decided to make it twice the size of that recommended by the Independent Commission of Enquiry (COI) which recommended a maximum 30-35 ha expansion.

The Iemma Government's decision to concentrate the bulk of NSW's container trade at Port Botany will see a tripling of containers being processed, and although there are plans to double the current percentage of containers being transported by freight rail from 20% to 40%, there will still be a 200% increase in container trucks on Sydney's roads.

Due to the lack of appropriate road and rail infrastructure to support the current levels of containers being transported, the decision to expand Port Botany and concentrate all the container processing through Sydney is going to have a long-term detrimental impact on traffic congestion. These extra 3000 container trucks per day will be spewing out carcinogenic fine diesel particles across Sydney. Port Botany is a sleeping giant that will eventually strangle Sydney's already choking roads and the Iemma Government's decision to expand Port Botany follows on the back of the controversial infrastructure developments including the Cross City Tunnel, the Sydney Airport to Central rail link, the totally inadequate M5 to name a few.

Botany Beach (aka Foreshore Beach), Which is enjoyed by a wide range of people from all over Sydney, including families, anglers, sail board riders, jet skiers etc. and which is one of the very few Sydney beaches where dogs are allowed, was to remain a sandy public beach as part of the port expansion, however, that NSW government has changed the design after the approval and now plans to build a rock seawall along 80% of the beach making it unusable. Taking a beach away is considered totally un-Australian!

Botany Bay is seen as the birthplace of European Australia where Captain Cook and the first Fleet arrived. Unfortunately, after 200 years, competing interests by government and industry has seen the Bay treated as a toilet. Now the Iemma Government is planning to develop a desalination plant where the salt from the desalination will be discharged into the Bay and the water pipes will be running across the bay and through a number of Sydney suburbs.

A note on procedure

Premiers are not elected by their party. The party with a majority elects a leader who is invited by the Governor to form a government. 121.45.218.12 (talk) 09:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion

Would be good to have references/links for the other 'important local issues'. Ben Aveling 22:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Gosh, you're not the same Ben Aveling who's the ALP Alexandria branch secretary, are you? Gosh, that would be embarrassing, what with you removing stuff that isn't particularly complementary about Mrs Keneally. But i'm sure you're not relation at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.126.39 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am the same Ben Aveling. I assume you are referring to this edit? That was a tough call. On the one hand, yes I am an involved party. On the other, the edit I reverted was inappropriate, arguably vandalism, and it had to be reverted by someone. I opted to be bold. Do you think I did wrong? Cheers, Ben Aveling 12:31, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Stem cell research vote

Wikipedia frequently lists how politicians have voted. In particular, the stem cell research vote was contentious (that it "didn't get much play" in her electorate is irrelevant, since it was not a local issue but one that effected the entire state) and influenced by her religious beliefs. It's certainly an important thing to have on her wiki page. The desal stuff is total opinion, however, perfectly reasonable thing to dump.Janeinhouse (talk) 02:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

It's certainly something she feels very strongly about - but we'd have to find some citable sources talking about her influence on the vote. That is, we need to demonstrate that her influence was significant when compared to the other MPs who also spoke and voted for or against the issue. I suspect she would have spoken on the subject, which would be in Hansard. The tricky bit is demonstrating that her stance made a difference. Cheers, Ben Aveling 07:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

No, its not necessary to debate whether her vote made a difference - its only necessary to cite the fact that she voted against it and its important to do so as it shows her position on an issue of important social significance.

Bravado760 (talk) 23:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Correction

Thomas Keneally has 2 daughters, so he cannot be Kristina's father-in-law. In fact, she is married not to his non-existent son, but to his nephew Ben. Citation attached.

Australian mother?

I'm not getting a clear picture here. According to this article ("Labor's least likely"), she met her husband Ben in Poland, when he noticed the opal she was wearing and commented that 90% of the world's opals are found in Australia, to which she replied "I know, my mother was born there". So far, so good.

But later on, there's a brief family background. Her grandmother, Patricia, a barmaid from Brisbane, fell for George Powell, an American GI during WW2, and went back to the US with him to live. There's no mention of where their daughter (KKK's mother, Cathy) was born, but she "lived all over the US on air force bases" before marrying John Kerscher. I suppose Cathy must have been born in Australia and was taken to the US at a very early age. This would make her an Australian citizen by birth, but just calling her "an Australian mother" seems to suggest someone who was brought up in Australia and just happened to marry an American. Ideas for better wording?

Another possibility is that she said "My grandmother was born there" and it got mistranslated as "mother". -- JackofOz (talk)

In her maiden speech Keneally said "My grandparents had a daughter, my mother Catherine, while they lived in Brisbane. She, in turn, grew up and married an American serviceman, my father John." WWGB (talk) 04:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, OK. So her mother was born in Brisbane. But she became American (at least by adoption, and possibly formally through her father) at a very young age. I'd prefer we call her mother "Australian-born", rather than simply "Australian". -- JackofOz (talk) 06:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Is her teenage basketball coach's daughter's identity all that important?

"As a teenage basketballer at the Academy she was coached by Marty Holmes, father of actress Katie Holmes." True, but also just a tad trivial? Any objections to removing it? MurfleMan (talk) 01:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

I would generally say no because it probably does not meet the WP:Notability guidelines to be included, which is requirement on wikipedia. Good Question!BLUE_DOG^TN 04:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

No, like we don't name Obama's teenage basketball coach. LibStar (talk) 04:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Not an apt comparison. Is Obama's coach famous in his own right? Does he perhaps have a famous daughter notable enough to have her own WP article? If so, maybe we would give it a very brief mention. Or maybe not; it's a borderline question. I think if Mr Holmes himself were notable he should have been mentioned here; but since the notable person is his daughter, and Ms Holmes herself doesn't seem to have any direct connection to Ms Keneally, the connection is a bit too tenuous to warrant inclusion. -- Zsero (talk) 06:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nationality

Did she ever renounce her US citizenship? Is there any reliable source for that? LibStar correctly questions whether it's true that foreign citizens may not be NSW MPs. Section 13A of the NSW constitution forbids sitting MPs from becoming foreign nationals, but it says nothing about having to renounce foreign nationalities they already had before becoming MPs. Nor does Section 12 say anything about holding foreign citizenships. The federal constitution explicitly prohibits foreign nationals from sitting in Parliament, and several MPs have been ejected under that provision, but I can't see any similar provision for NSW. So how do we know she isn't still a US citizen? Note that Australian naturalisation does not require the renunciation of other allegiances, and hasn't since 1990 or thereabouts. -- Zsero (talk) 23:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

This article in Toledo on the Move which looks to be a local Toledo feed of NBC News says: "Keneally did give up her U.S. citizenship a few years ago when she decided to run for Parliament in Australia and her father John, an Air Force veteran, says it was difficult to see his daughter make that decision, but he understands that she has adopted Australia as her new homeland." --Canley (talk) 00:29, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

This article in Toledo daily newspaper The Blade says "Per Australian requirements, Mrs. Keneally renounced her U.S. citizenship before running for a seat in the 93-member parliament." I'll add these to the article shortly. --Canley (talk) 00:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Qualification and Disqualification of Members of Parliament specifically states "A person with dual citizenship may become a member of the Parliament of New South Wales.". It appears that she did renounce her US citizenship, but probably didn't have to. --Canley (talk) 00:44, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, she may have surrendered her U.S. citizenship due to U.S. law. The Sydney Morning Herald says "She surrendered her American citizenship in 2000 so she could become an Australian and joined the Labor Party the same year, following Ben and his family into the ALP fold.". Looking at the U.S. State Department website on Advice about Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality, voluntarily "obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA)" is one of the "potentially expatriating acts" which can result in loss of U.S. citizenship. --Canley (talk) 00:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Or perhaps not, reading further down that State Department document, naturalized citizens can indicate they wish to retain their U.S. citizenship, or it is assumed unless they specifically request to relinquish it. However, there is also a document on Advice About Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Seeking Public Office in a Foreign State, which states "This administrative premise is not applicable when an individual seeks public elected office in a foreign state or other policy-level position. In such cases, the Department of State will carefully ascertain the individual's intent toward U.S. citizenship." --Canley (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

THe State Dept may "carefully ascertain the individual's intent", but all that matters is that intent. US citizenship can't be lost involuntarily; the State Dept may not like it, but it is powerless to do anything about it. The only way to lose US citizenship is to voluntarily renounce it, or to be found to have fraudulently obtained it in the first place (e.g. by lying on ones naturalisation application, or by ones parents having lied about ones birthplace). What the State Dept document means is that if you seek a foreign office they will send you a questionnaire that asks "why did you renounce your US citizenship? was it a, b, c, d, or some other reason?" No matter how you answer that question, you're saying the premise is true; the only way out is to mark the question not applicable, because you didn't renounce it. -- Zsero (talk) 02:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

This reference, already cited in her infobox, states "2000 - Surrenders American citizenship, becomes an Australian." WWGB (talk) 02:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

That contradicts the source that says she gave it up "when she decided to run for Parliament in Australia", which wouldn't seem to have been until 2003, unless it took her that long to campaign for preselection. -- Zsero (talk) 02:56, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

It's not necessarily a contradiction. She didn't move to Australia to enter politics, and it wasn't until later that she decided to run. Presumably she made the decision enter politics and renounced her US citizenship in 2000, and then ran in the next election in 2003. - Bilby (talk) 03:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Flags

User:Watchover originally put the US flag in the infobox for Ms Keneally's birth place, and that was properly reverted. But then he put it in the nationality section, and that was again reverted. Can anyone explain why it would be inappropriate for that section to have both flags? WP:FLAGBIO clearly does not apply to that section, and implies that flag icons are especially appropriate there. -- Zsero (talk) 07:27, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for you comments. You are terminally right, putting the US flag next to the birth place and Keneally's home until nine years ago is not appropriate according to Do not use flags to indicate locations of birth and death at WP:FLAGBIO. Although next to her nationality, is a different situation, it is a quick, appropriate and relevant visual reference for researchers distinguishing the United States of America from South America and so on. It is not covered in under WP:FLAGBIO and therefore applies to the Nationality section of this article. Cheers, Watchover (talk) 09:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Do not emphasize nationality without good reason seems relevant here. WWGB (talk) 14:33, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

It is the nationality section of the infobox, after all. Nationality is the point of that section, so the concern cited there isn't relevant. And the fact that the subject changed nationalities makes it more interesting and deserving of the emphasis that flags would bring. Of course both flags should be inserted, not just the USA one as Watchover did. -- Zsero (talk) 15:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Zsero. Timeshift (talk) 16:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I see the rather crappy flagcruft has been re-added. Can someone please share what purpose the flag(s) actually add, other that making the page look colourful , (colorful )? It clutters the infobox and quite frankly is distracting. It also overemphasises the birth nationality of the subject (Isn't this normally a bad thing?). The assumption of consensus was presumptuous and premature and the flags should be removed. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 02:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Why is it "normally a bad thing"? The only reason given for not putting flags on birthplaces is because they may falsely be taken to imply nationality. But here nationality is precisely the point, so how can it be overemphasi[sz]ed? And there's nothing wrong with a splash of colo[u]r to liven up a box of boring text. -- Zsero (talk) 03:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Flags look appalling, and are redundant to the word description. Thus, why is it needed? --Merbabu (talk) 06:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Mattinbgn and Merbabu. Nick-D (talk) 06:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Good to see so much discussion over a bloody flag for the subjects former nationality! Mattinbgn, I must stress that your comments don't read very neutral, how are the flags crappy and distracting? I don't find anything wrong with the Stars and Stripes. Merbabu obviliously didn't read my first comment, being that the use of the flag distinguishes South America from North America, and pin-points her nationality as being from the USA, thus why is the use of the flag 'redundant'? WWGB, HER former nationality is very relevant re: first US person to hold a high elected office in Australia.

Has anyone a problem with displaying both the and in her nationality section? Watchover (talk) 09:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

They are redundant to the far more universally accepted symbols, otherwise known as words, "Australia" and "United States". I don't understand your last sentence, but let me repeat: flags serve no purpose. --Merbabu (talk) 09:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

According to this Wikipedia guideline, "placing a national flag next to something can make its nationality or location seem to be of greater significance than other things". WWGB (talk) 10:50, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Exactly WWGB, without good reason... It is a good reason, her nationality in Australian politics is highly notable. Watchover (talk) 00:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

It's highly unusual, rather than "highly notable". Either way, why do we need flags? --Merbabu (talk) 01:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Visual reference, appropriate, strong guidence, relative, decorative, looks appropriate in the info box, is allowed and acceptable under Wikipedia:Flagcruft#Do not emphasize nationality without good reason, distinguishes, has good cause. There is nothing "unusual" at all about an American turned Australian citizen of this stature, nothind at all. Watchover (talk) 05:11, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

O'Farrell

Why does O'Farrell need a flag icon? [1] --Merbabu (talk) 12:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

No Offence, but...

"and strict environmental management during construction, around the desalination pipeline works between Erskineville and Kurnell"

There building a pipeline... the reference provided does not show any environmental management, let alone strict environmental management. I would be happy to remove the strict bit... as there is no proof provided that it was "strict". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.200.231.65 (talk) 10:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Saying that, I agree with the removing of the botany bay container stuff, unless the new Premier was a vocal supporter of the expansion.

Voter Backlash / Demise of Labor : Penrith By-Election

Shouldn't the huge swing against the Keneally administration in the Penrith Electorate by-election be noted within this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.70.109.179 (talk) 14:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

No, it's a swing against the party in government, not the premier of the day. WWGB (talk) 14:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Premier

On 3 December 2009, Keneally won a party room ballot against Premier Nathan Rees with a majority of 45–21, gaining the support of the dominant right faction of the Labor Party caucus. Prior to the vote, Nathan Rees declared "Should I not be Premier at the end of this day, let there be no doubt in the community's mind that any challenger would be a puppet of Eddie Obeid and Joe Tripodi", a claim previously rejected by Keneally, who stated "I am nobody's puppet, I am nobody's protege, I am nobody's girl."

|}

Jazzy78 (talk) 03:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Done Thanks, Stickee (talk) 03:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

dec 09 to dec 10

this article contains nothing about her career holding the highest office in NSW for this period. It's a glaring gap. LibStar (talk) 06:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, it does mention that she privatised electricity and prorogued parliament early. WWGB (talk) 12:40, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

that really only became an issue in Dec 10. how about up to Nov 10? LibStar (talk) 13:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

One would imagine that the "highest office" in New South Wales is that of Governor, if not monarch. --Pete (talk) 14:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

the article contains no information on Keneally from Dec 09 to Nov 10. LibStar (talk) 23:19, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Then perhaps find some and add it? You obviously know how WP works ... WWGB (talk) 23:28, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Executive?

She led the first two-woman executive (Premier and Deputy Premier) in Australian history.

Seems a rather odd way of expressing whatever it's trying to express. Is the pairing of Premier and Deputy Premier regularly referred to as the "executive" in Oz politics? I've never heard of it.

Maybe it ought to be something like: Her appointment as Premier meant that, for the first time in Australian history, both the Premier and the Deputy Premier of a state were women. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 03:50, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

With regards to the NSW Premier, the term "Executive" seems to be used to refer to the high-level staff of the NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet (see Our Executive), so I agree this should be reworded. --Canley (talk) 23:59, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Most government departments refer to their highest ranked staff as their 'executive'. Calling a premier and deputy premier an 'executive' is pretty unusual though. Nick-D (talk) 07:40, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I've done something about it. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Catholic University of America?

Why is she listed at the bottom as an alum of Catholic University of America? According to the article, she got her degree at University of Dayton. In fact, there is no mention of CUA in the article at all, though it does say she went to Australian Catholic University briefly. Academic38 (talk) 05:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Agreed and removed. WWGB (talk) 05:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

conflicts of interest

Kenneallys career is well documented to be full of conflicts of interest. Her connections to various development companies, and her recent issue with her husband owning shares in the ONLY of the companies offered an interview for installing infrastructure for electric cars are just TWO of the situations I am talking about - do you not think this is something that should be highlighted in the article about her? there is strong anti-keneally sentiment throughout NSW, which I think is quite defining in her career, which is the only notable thing about her and therefore warrants discussion.

please remember I am talking about well documented things here, not original research.Shuggyg (talk) 10:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Please provide published sources. Nick-D (talk) 10:48, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/keneally-feels-heat-over-not-declaring-interest-20101101-17agj.html to start, but actually i'm going to propose a semi-rewrite on this page.Shuggyg (talk) 06:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Poor representation of Ms. Kenneally's time in NSW politics

This article is little more than a fluff piece. There is no mention of the political climate during which Kenneally was raised to Premier, the ousting of Nathan Reese, her association with Tripodi Obeid and the other Terrigals faction members and her husband's role in the affair, this article fails to mention her unusual push behind barangaroo, from vetoing EPA and local planning laws to push it through right up to creating a new position, taken by herself, as 'minister for barangaroo'. This article also fails to mention her unpopular moves to veto local planning laws in Surry Hills to facilitate access to a global catholic meeting held in Sydney while she was premier. There is no mention of her airline expenses scandal. There is no mention of her giving her husband a contract worth millions without disclosing conflict of interest. There is no mention of the huge uproar and scandal surrounding the selling of NSW electricity assetts, nor the early proroguing of the NSW parliament both to get rid of the evidence of her incompetence, and as NSW labor right faction were trying to scupper NSW to improve medium term re-election possibility immediately afterwards which is a highly unusual and unprecedented move which has been publicly speculated as an effort to avoid an enquiry into the sale of the asset which was conducted afterwards anyway. This is all not to mention that the only reason she sat for heffron is because the party asked her to stand in place of her husband in the election for heffron.

various sources: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/turn-off-keneally-blocks-probe-into-power-sale-by-closing-parliament-20101222-194z7.html http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/kristina-keneally-defends-labors-ruthless-kingpins-joe-tripodi-and-eddie-obeid/story-fn4lqo4t-1225807144563 http://www.smh.com.au/national/discredited-despised-but-still-pulling-all-the-strings-20091204-k9yy.html http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/premiers-bid-to-grab-planning-powers-20100331-rewn.html http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/keneally-plugs-into-parking-pay-day-20101217-190s0.html http://www.streetcorner.com.au/news/showPost.cfm?bid=19292&mycomm=SC http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/building-on-barangaroo-debacle-20110310-1botn.html http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/premier-admits-to-another-airline-freebie-20100606-xn7w.html http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/premier-krisitna-keneallys-4m-spending-spree/story-e6frewt0-1225872954189 http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/keneally-details-husbands-1m-deal-20100914-15azr.html http://www.smh.com.au/national/brawler-who-never-played-like-a-girl-20091203-k8uo.html http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/keneally-plugs-into-parking-pay-day-20101217-190s0.html Shuggyg (talk) 06:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Worth mentioning?

• Opposed embryonic stem cell research and has voted to block it in New South Wales.

I've removed this because I don't think that it had much play in the electorate, or that Kristina's part in it was quite as significant as in the other issues. If I'm wrong, we should explain. Politicians vote for and against lots of things all the time. Regards, Ben Aveling 10:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

• I would say that it is a good idea to include it; Kristina Keneally's political persona was that she was a progressive 'in-touch' politician for a progressive labor party. To be anti-stem cell flies in the face of the persona she attempts to create for herself, it is more about describing who she really is; if you feel that is biased we can level it with something positive she has done, perhaps something neither self serving, outside the domains of benefiting herself or the catholic church or the Terrigals! I'm sure there would be something! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shuggyg (talk • contribs) 00:28, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Bias Tag Insertion

The "Political Controversies" section has a very partisan tone against Ms. Keneally. Please help to reword the section to be politically and linguistically neutral. It currently sounds like it was written by the people she beat in the last election or something. The Moody Blue (Talk) 20:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• I don't think she actually beat anyone in the last election, she is in a safe labour seat, and she was utterly decimated as premier. But that is neither here nor there, the whole keneally page looks like it has been written by ALP spin-doctors, indeed Ben Aveling, former secretary of the Alexandria Branch of the ALP, has admitted himself to effecting changes to the content of the page during the last election period. With that in mind, a bias tag should be inserted, but right at the top of the page. Nevertheless, her time as premier has been marred by controversy and there is no two ways about it. The nature in which she was installed as premier was highly contentious, her very obvious links to the terrigals, the quotes that she was not a puppet, yet she forcibly removed opponents to the terrigals, the privatisation of NSW electricity alongside progroguing the government early to help avoid a formal enquiry, the brief time in which Ms. Keneally was premier was without question highly contentious, and that she has been one of the most contentious yet brief premiers of NSW is within its own right, noteworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shuggyg (talk • contribs) 04:03, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

The first step would be to expunge the article of the word 'controversy' and just replace it with an explanation of the things that happened, at least in the lede and the section header names. For example, the lead mentions her preselection was controversial, but without any description of what that means, making it a worthless statement. Ashmoo (talk) 15:00, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Kristina Keneally. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091002042822/http://www.dadhc.nsw.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/96A64126-72BE-4316-9E0B-5A0DCD5147E2/2172/AR_00_01.pdf to http://www.dadhc.nsw.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/96A64126-72BE-4316-9E0B-5A0DCD5147E2/2172/AR_00_01.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090902152245/http://www.sydneywater.com.au:80/MajorProjects/Desalination/documents/Traffic.pdf to http://www.sydneywater.com.au/MajorProjects/Desalination/documents/Traffic.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120320173612/http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/polling/display_poll_data.pl?url_caller=&mode=trend&page=show_polls&question_set_id=11 to http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/polling/display_poll_data.pl?url_caller=&mode=trend&page=show_polls&question_set_id=11
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120321021509/http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/polling//display_poll_data.pl?mode=trend&page=continue_results&question_id=2426&url_caller= to http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/polling/display_poll_data.pl?mode=trend&page=continue_results&question_id=2426&url_caller=

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:24, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

A few sources

She is MUCH better looking than REES!
Kristina Keneally becomes first female premier of NSW
Kristina Keneally set to take Premier's job --220.101.28.25 (talk) 09:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

"Born in the United States She emigrated to Australia in 1994 and they married in 1996. She became a naturalised Australian in 2000, the same year she joined the ALP."

keneally-takes-over-as-premier
I hope she doesn't have a strong American accent! (Sorry American friends)
--220.101.28.25 (talk) 10:00, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Katrina [sic] Keneally is Catholic feminist with American twang Nooooooo!(Just kidding!)
--220.101.28.25 (talk) 10:15, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Getting nasty now! Keneally nothing but a puppet: O'Farrell 21:53 AEST 3 December 2009/ Accessed 22:05 AEST 3 December 2009 --220.101.28.25 (talk) 11:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

The Daily Telegraph got her first name wrong in their story! Her birth name's not Katrina Marie Kerscher. SignOfTheDoubleCross (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Proceeds of house sale

I'd suggest that this $ figure be removed - as reported in the media (probably a Real Estate page) the $ figure is certainly in the public domain but I can't see why it should then persist indefinitely in a person's Wikipedia page and I can't recall seeing info such as this elsewhere in Wikipedia. It was originally part of a block of data, the rest of which was promptly removed (along with the citation for that block!), but this wasn't... Thoughts? David64T WP (talk) 10:59, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Agree .  Removed. WWGB (talk) 11:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Photo

The photo currently on this page (File:Kristina Keneally Portrait 2009.jpg) is a 2009 photo that looks rather like she was caught thinking about what she was about to have for breakfast. File:Kuristenak.png appears to be a much better photograph, but it was uploaded by a fairly new user, purported to be their own work, and looks identical to the photo on her how to vote card [2]. Does anyone else have an opinion? --Scott Davis ^Talk 03:17, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

There's been a few different photos upload in recent weeks with questionable 'own work' licences which have since been deleted because they've been ripped from other sources (like vote cards or other websites as you suggest). I agree the only free media photo is not a great picture of her, and I've searched for a free to use photo of her unsucessfully, but its all we got right now (if she wins Bennelong a profile photo of her will be added to the Federal Govt website, which have compatible licencing, but if she doesn't win we might be relying on a voter uploading a photo of her on the polling booth!) -- Whats new?^(talk) 03:35, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Exactly the same photo. I don't know how we could use it, because it's most likely fraudulent. --Pete (talk) 03:37, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I've posted to the uploader's talk page and also to commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Suspect photos of election candidates so they can be either cleared or removed (and expecting the latter). Maybe someone can get a selfie with her tomorrow, then crop themselves out of it :-) --Scott Davis ^Talk 03:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Photographs of Australian politicians have been difficult for us to source properly. We can't use campaign material or news media images because we need a CC license, and happy snaps with iphones and so on at campaign rallies or sausage sizzles are usually pretty woeeful. Yes, I think our current image isn't up to scratch and it would be lovely to capture her in a better light. She has a sunnier disposition than that implied by our image. But we don't seem to have a better image that we can legally use. --Pete (talk) 09:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

She's American

This article should be re-written entirely in American English and all dates changed to mm/dd/yy format. Heepman1997 (talk) 10:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

If Keneally was American, she could not be an Australian politician. Give yourself an uppercut. WWGB (talk) 11:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)