Talk:Nick McKenzie

Nick McKenzie is currently a Magazines and print journalism good article nominee. Nominated by TarnishedPath^talk at 01:57, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review it according to the good article criteria to decide whether or not to list it as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and save the page. (See here for the good article instructions.)

Short description: Australian investigative journalist

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nick McKenzie article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 3 months

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a contentious topic.

Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Nick McKenzie (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 26 May 2025 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

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

Australia: Victoria / Melbourne / Politics / Television Low‑importance

	Australia portal Nick McKenzie 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian television (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Victoria.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Current consensus (April 2024):

In this RfC it was determined that there was consensus to remove contentious material concerning the civil trial between Peter Schiff and others.

NSW found McKenzie's 60 Minutes report defamatory

Why is this not mentioned anywhere? https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/01/business/peter-schiff-defamation-settlement-nine.html Reading the article you'd think McKenzie is an exceptional journalist yet the Supreme Court of NSW found his report defamatory. At the very least this should be mentioned here. 115.70.36.116 (talk) 12:05, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to the banner up above which has the heading "Current consensus ..." TarnishedPath^talk 13:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page includes other civil trials where the decision was favourable to McKenzie. Why not include trials where he lost? This was a NSW Supreme court decision. The defendants admitted to defamation in the settlement in addition to the judge's ruling. 115.70.36.116 (talk) 11:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to this discussion for any questions you might have. TarnishedPath^talk 11:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Nick McKenzie

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I am looking for guidance on how to improve the article prior to nominating it for WP:GA

Thanks, TarnishedPath^talk 05:47, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

@TarnishedPath: I took a quick look through the article. Here are my thoughts below:

I added a citation needed tag. This should be resolved before the nomination.
The "Career" section has many one-sentence paragraphs. These should be merged together so it doesn't seem like a list.
Most of the sections are too long: I suggest 2-4 paragraphs per heading. Either use level 3 headings or trim the text and merge the paragraphs to make it more succinct.
What makes "Democracy's Watchdogs" a reliable source?
Any information about his personal life?

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 14:41, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and get all of this done tonight. Thankyou for your time providing guidance. TarnishedPath^talk 04:35, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, I've edited to directly address dot points 1, 2 and 4 above. I've also combined paragraphs in other sections which I hope address dot point 3 above. Regarding his person life, an LLM reckons that he's married to Rachel Baxendale who works for Murdoch press entities, however I've not been able to locate anything reliable confirming that. Please let me know if what I've done so far as adequately addressed your points and if there is anything further you would suggest. TarnishedPath^talk 12:59, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TarnishedPath: The lead says McKenzie won 16 Walkley awards, but the "Walkley Awards" section says he won 10. These numbers should be the same. Z1720 (talk) 14:45, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720, seems he's won 20. I've updated both. Any further suggestions? TarnishedPath^talk 12:41, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TarnishedPath: No other concerns after a quick skim. I would suggest bringing this to GAN when ready, where a more thorough review can take place. Z1720 (talk) 15:25, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]