Talk:Douglas Wood (engineer)

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Douglas Wood (engineer) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Biography

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

Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Iraq Low‑importance

	Iraq portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I need a source for the claim that it is going directly to the kidnappers, the story from The Australian doesn't make this claim, Philip Ruddock (see daily telegraph story) appears to support Hilaly's actions in visiting baghdad. not that i disagree that the ransom payment scenario is likely, but it would be good to have a source. clarkk 02:25, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Herald-Sun today says: "The family urged the captors to tell them, through intermediaries, how they wanted the money to be spent." I agree this isn't a direct payment, but it amounts to the same thing. If the kidnappers accept the "donation" it will go to a bogus "charity" controlled by them (a very common phenomenon in the Arab world), and will be spent on funding more terrorism and kidnappings. Adam 03:26, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Adam completely. PMA 03:50, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps so, but without a source, this is entirely irrelevant. Ambi 10:51, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided a source. Adam 10:53, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't be this on the front page news now?

Shouldn't be this on the front page news now that he's been freed? It seems to be quite big news in Australia at least. sec fan 10:05, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Article not NPOV

This article is no way NPOV. The last paragraphs need to be corrected or eliminated as they are opinionated and appear hostile towards Douglas Wood. Why doesn't the article mention that he was constantly beaten up by the kidnappers and this was backed up by another Swedish hostage. Also it does not mention the fact that he apologised to the Australian government for making those statements about troops pulling out of Iraq. edited by 202.138.215.58 (Talk) at 05:00, 21 July 2005

The last paragraphs are not opinionated:

1. Wood confirmed in the Channel interview that he had $176,000 with him when he was kidnapped

2. Wood benefited from Sheikh hilally and his family making noises about wanting to help Iraqi people. Wood is an arsehole for making an "apology", all it does is make sure the next hostage gets killed

3. Wood has returned after an extended absence to Australia for medical treatment because it is free.

4. His hostage taking experience was horrible, however he was not an innocent abroad. His rank opportunism clearly has hurt his credit in Australia.

edited by 220.239.179.10 (Talk) at 13:04, 12 August 2005

BLP and VER apply

The material in this article needs to follow WP:VER and WP:BLP. I have removed most of the unsourced material as per BLP. Pls supply sources. SmithBlue (talk) 04:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why didn't you just tag the page? Seeing as there were no disputed claims it would have been much simpler and a lot less work than someone putting it all back with the sources added later. I just did a quick search and everything you deleted has good sources available. I just don't have time to sort them all out and add them myself atm. Wayne (talk) 05:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page was tagged at 17:03, 27 December 2007.

I dispute all unsourced material in a BLP especially that which is potentially libellous. The page contained many serious statements not linked to sources as demanded by BLP.

BLP demands references on the page - not an editor, no matter how respected, saying that references are available.

I think WP is better off without masses of information in a BLP unverifiable by a casual reader or someone without a lot of time - WP claims to be an encyclopedia, a source of verified and readily verifiable information from specified sources.

I can understand a contributing editor feeling disappointed, do remember that the good work that editors have produced here is still easily and quickly available for referencing (and then re-inclusion) via the history tab. I am open to discussion on any of these points. SmithBlue (talk) 12:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Douglas Wood (engineer). 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:

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:39, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]