Talk:Rona Ambrose
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Photo
The current photo of Rona Ambrose shows her caught in the moment, and as a result is not a very good photo. For this reason, I will delete the photo from the page until someone can find a more neutral and appropriate one.
I disagree. The photo is a proper representation.
Rona is beautiful, wow, if every female MP were as gorgeous as she is, I would be addicted to politics.
The current picture of Ms. Ambrose is terrible, and whoever changed it from its original pic, wants to mock her. It does not matter whether you dislike her or disagree with her policies. What matters is that we uphold the neutrality of this article.
- If you can find a fair-use picture that is more aesthetic, than by all means replace it. Otherwise, the picture should stay. mhunter 19:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
This is an accurate photo of Ms. Ambrose.
Ummm ... can people please sign their comments? Use four tildes (~). This will provide a name/date/time stamp, which makes it easier to review and understand the entries. Thanks, Hu Gadarn 20:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- I found a way better picture of her. It is Image:Rona Ambrose1.jpg. FellowWikipedian 20:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recent non-objective edits
Several edits have been made lately on both sides of the political spectrum which take away from the objectivity of this article. Let's keep it unbiased by avoiding this behavior. --Mattpope 05:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
- Also, please don't make major changes to the article, and not provide reasons for them, using an anonymous IP. This appears highly suspect.
Hi. While I also dislike anon. edits, this is still acceptable in wikipedia. In addition, do you mind signing your comments so we can better understand your comments (e.g. it helps when there are several exchanges in a discussion page between users). Thanks, Hu Gadarn 20:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)