Australian greyhound racing live baiting scandal 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animal rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
animal rights 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.Animal rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Animal rightsTemplate:WikiProject Animal rightsAnimal rights articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
Canidae and commonly referred to as "dogs" and of which the domestic
dog is but one of its many members, 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.DogsWikipedia:WikiProject DogsTemplate:WikiProject DogsDogs articles
Does this current event really deserve it's own stand-alone wikipedia page? Obviously live baiting has a history in greyhound racing, as various state governments have in the past taken action to outlaw it. Given this fact, and given that the topic of 'greyhound racing' already has it's own page which includes information live baiting - shouldn't this current event merely be a subsection on the 'greyhound racing' wikipedia page? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
10KittyKat01 (
talk •
contribs)
03:01, 10 May 2015 (UTC)reply
10KittyKat01, I would certainly say yes, now that in the interim there has been an Inquiry in new south wales that led to a ban being schudeled for 1 July 2017, and the ACT also stating that they would ban greyhound racing.
220ofBorg14:17, 25 July 2016 (UTC)reply
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not moved. There is a consensus that this is a notable topic in its own right, and that certainly a wider article is needed, but that should be created separately. —
Amakuru (
talk)
13:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)reply
Oppose. We need a separate article about the greyhound racing industry, but demolishing this article to create it is absolutely not the answer. This scandal poses the greatest threat to the existence of the greyhound industry in its history, appears set to end it in at least one state, has sparked at least one judicial inquiry and has thousands and thousands of sources at this point. It absolutely warrants a summary style link in a summary section in a broader article, but it is absolutely ludicrous to delete content on a massive, well-sourced and ongoing issue that is still making headlines (with significant political and commercial ramifications) daily after many months. We had two parliamentary secretaries sacked over the political fallout of this issue, what, yesterday? How can that be a footnote in a general industry article?
The Drover's Wife (
talk)
20:17, 27 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Support the need for rescoping, per
WP:NPOV, but that's a general article talk discussion, not a
WP:RM discussion. Anyway, we do not need a separate article on the scandal unless and until such time as an article on the broader topic is so large as to warrant a
WP:SPLIT, per
WP:SUMMARY. —
SMcCandlish ☺☏¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 21:29, 30 August 2016 (UTC)reply
This is backwards. We already have a detailed article on this. The need for the creation of a separate article on the broader topic doesn't magically erase the tons of content and sources here.
The Drover's Wife (
talk)
01:09, 31 August 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.