As for your changes to the lead section of the article, please read WP:LEAD, which is Wikipedia's guideline on those: it currently does what its supposed to, summarising his career in about the correct length, and your changes would render it defective and in need of fixing as being far too brief.
As for your other changes, you seem to be chopping out well-sourced information left, right and centre for no justifiable reason that I can see: I can't even work out what "politically motivated bias" you think I have, or what political leanings you're coming from - to me, your edits just seem to be gutting the article for no apparent reason.
I'm more than happy to discuss any changes you'd like to make on the talk page, but your lead edits have been, as they currently stand, against Wikipedia policy, and your edits to the body just don't seem to make sense to me. I can't have a fight with someone when I can't even work out where he's coming from or what his logic is, so please take it to talk and hash it out there. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:53, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- I have read the WP:LEAD page and it clearly states the introduction for a biography of a living person must be a summary, not a commentary on certain matters involving that person's life, as the change you keep reverting to does.
- I am a former administrative and legislative clerk who worked for more than two decades at a state's parliament house and am dedicated to ensuring biographies of former politicians of all political parties follow Wikipedia's neutrality guide. A cursory glance of this former politician's page clearly demonstrates it is motivated by political bias, with broad generalisations and only angle of the argument/situation presented.
- How is the lead of Campbell Newman a commentary on certain matters involving that person's life, as opposed to a summary? What "political bias" do you think it has? This is not a "you're wrong" comment, this is a "your perspective is mystifying" comment (I'm not even sure if you think it's pro-Labor or pro-LNP). The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:05, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Here's how: Consider the lead of Ted Bailieu (a former state premier) with the original lead of Campbell Newman, also a former state premier. Bailieu's lead is a succinct summary and overview of the person, rather than getting in to detail about an aspect of his life (the way the Newman lead did).
Bailieu's lead Edward "Ted" Norman Baillieu (born 31 July 1953) is a former Australian politician who was Premier of Victoria from 2010 to 2013. He was a Liberal Party of Australia member of the Victorian Legislative Assembly from 1999 to 2014, representing the electorate of Hawthorn. He was elected leader of the Liberal Party in opposition in 2006, and served as Premier from 2010 until 2013 after winning the 2010 state election. He resigned as Premier on 6 March 2013, and was succeeded by Denis Napthine.
Newman's (old) lead you keep insisting on: Campbell Kevin Thomas Newman (born 12 August 1963) is a former Australian politician who served as the 38th Premier of Queensland from 26 March 2012 to 14 February 2015; he lost his own seat at the 2015 state election. Newman served as the Member for Ashgrove in the Legislative Assembly of Queensland between March 2012 and 31 January 2015. He was the Leader of the Liberal National Party (LNP) from 2 April 2011 to 7 February 2015, and was the 15th Lord Mayor of Brisbane from 27 March 2004 to 3 April 2011.
Newman was elected lord mayor as a member of the Liberal Party. He became a member of the LNP following the July 2008 merger of the Queensland Liberals and Nationals.[1]
In March 2011, Newman announced that he would challenge Leader of the Opposition John-Paul Langbroek for the leadership of the LNP. Langbroek resigned, and Newman was elected his successor. As Newman was not a member of the Legislative Assembly, former state Nationals' leader Jeff Seeney was elected interim opposition leader while Newman headed the party's election team from outside the legislature.
Newman led the LNP to a landslide victory in the 2012 state election, allowing it to form government for the first time in its history. At the same time, he won election to the seat of Ashgrove in western Brisbane. He was sworn in as premier two days later.
At the 2015 state election, the Newman-led LNP suffered a large swing that resulted in a hung parliament; Newman himself lost the seat of Ashgrove to his Labor predecessor, Kate Jones.[2] On 10 February 2015, Newman submitted his resignation[3] and he was replaced as Premier of Queensland by Annastacia Palaszczuk four days later as the Australian Labor Party formed a minority government. Brizvegan (talk) 04:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Just reading your revisions, you have removed several well-referenced paragraphs which you claim show "clear political bias" and replaced them with various claims (which seem to me to have an anti-Labor slant), and none of which seem to be backed up in the references provided. I'm sorry, but does appear a bit suspect when a new account edits one article only, removes long-standing referenced content without discussion, and then throws around accusations of blatant bias. --Canley (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
- Here's the problem: Ted Baillieu is a bad example of a lead section. It's the sort of one we would tag as "needs expansion", where Newman's concisely summarises the article. See Wikipedia's featured articles for better examples of what Wikipedia expects lead sections to look like. How do you feel the Newman article is "getting into detail about an aspect of his life" (besides, as it should, summarising his political career)? Also, they're both from the same party, so I'm still completely perplexed at where you're coming from. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Which elements contained an "anti-Labor slant" Canley (talk)? I agree with some of your recent changes, however there is still much work to do on this page. The Campbell Newman page is merely the first of current or former Australian state premiers I will contribute edits to as Newman was one of the most controversial political figures in recent times. Brizvegan (talk) 00:46, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
- Well, here are the elements I marked up as POV and unreferenced:
- "The Labor Party’s campaigning efforts that began after Newman was preselected have been described as one of the "dirtiest election campaigns in Australia’s political history" – no indication who described it as such, and it is presented as a direct quote, which does not appear in the reference.
- "Despite Labor’s repeated attacks on the integrity of Newman, his wife Lisa, her parents and other friends and family, an investigation by the Crime and Misconduct Commission (CMC) cleared Newman of all allegations put forward by the Labor Party." – the reference is a very brief article which mentions the CMC clearing Bruce McIver, however there is no mention of Newman, or of Labor and its supposed "repeated attacks" on Newman and his family.
- "'The CMC conclusion and subsequent admission from Bligh that she had no evidence for Labor’s claims against Newman provided a devastating blow to her re-election campaign." – once again, very brief reference which has no mention of an "admission" from Bligh, or that the CMC's conclusion was a "devastating blow" to the ALP campaign.
- I agree with some of your edits as well, and agree the balance of the article could be improved—I would be fine with removing the "Noddy" nickname reference for example—but you need to be scrupulous about the references and neutral point of view. Perhaps you could offer a similar courtesy and list the items you consider to be biased and we could discuss and work on an acceptable compromise. --Canley (talk) 01:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
I agree Canley (talk) - over the next day or so I'll work on references and items I believe are biased and let's see if we can get to a point of acceptable compromise. I also hope we could collaborate on other state premiers (past and present) into the future. Thank you. Brizvegan (talk) 03:06, 17 February 2016 (UTC)