Talk:Phil Goff

Daily page views Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

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. This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Politics and Government 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 This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance). New Zealand: Politics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the New Zealand politics task force (assessed as Top-importance).

"Goff's performance in government is generally considered to be mediocre, despite his being one of the better known members of the Labour Party." - is this a legit change? Clockwork Troll 00:22, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so, no. On the other hand, the original statement could probably be seen as POV as well, since there's no evidence presented to back it up. I've removed the comment about his performance altogether, although it could be re-added if a concrete source emerges to back it. -- Vardion 01:24, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

"Goff is a strong advocate of putting ethical issues before national interests." Surely this is not a neutral statement, it is poly speak. It can be easily challenged, for example, Goff's handling of calls for inquiry into the Christchurch Creche (Ellis) case can be seen as putting institutional (national) issues above ethical. I'm asking for it to be removed. RichardJ Christie 22:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the caretaker Prime Minister? [1] says it is GoffTshiels1 (talk) 05:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

they have now changed itTshiels1 (talk) 03:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Clark is still the Prime Minister. She only resigned as leader of the party, not of the country.--Anon 09:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that while no New Zealander was surprised by the result of the 1990 election, Goff's televised concession speech (filmed at his home) was particulally well-spoken and the dramatic high-point of that election. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.254.246.237 (talk) 17:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a newer one? - nz26 Talk | Contribs | Email 10:22, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree -- the photo on this page looks old and like it was scanned from a newspaper or magazine. The photo on his parliament page is a clearer and I assume newer image ([2]) can it be used on here? 81.141.144.76 (talk) 20:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No it can't, unfortunately (it's the same situation as the PM's picture). The image is copyrighted. I can't find the copyright information, but I'm sure the usual Crown Copyright applies to the Parliament website. The only alternative is that someone submits their own pic of Goff (as is the case with the John Key article --Lholden (talk) 21:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Phil Goff. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140924023343/http://campaign.labour.org.nz/phil_goff to http://campaign.labour.org.nz/phil_goff

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) 15:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I propose changing the name of this page to Philip Goff (politician). There are currently three pages with similar names.

• Phil Goff, New Zealand politician;
• Philip Goff (philosopher), British philosopher
• Phillip Atiba Goff, America psychologist and race and police researcher.

I don't know if there is a more graceful way to resolve this issue, or how all this will affect how these names will be ranked in searches off Wikipedia, but this seems like the most equitable solution to me. DolyaIskrina (talk) 14:26, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose this. Phil Goff is invariably called Phil, and renaming the article to use Philip would be very unintuitive. Unless the philosopher or the psychologist are also commonly and professionally called Phil (which is perhaps less likely for academics) there is no need for disambiguation of this article title.-gadfium 20:49, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you'd feel the same about "Phil Goff (politician)"? I'm trying to find a way to make the disambiguation page the default. That would require a "Phil Goff" wikipedia search to redirect to the disambiguation page. That is to say, we'd need to rename this page in some way. Here in the States, Philip Goff (philosopher) is searched enough to be the first name that comes up in a google search. I think... I'm not too savvy about whether what I see in my personal google or duckduckgo search is representative, but regardless, Philip Goff (philosopher) is indeed getting a lot of media attention. Perhaps there is another workaround. DolyaIskrina (talk) 21:25, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]