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 sourcedmust 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.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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
Clinton Walker 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
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
An editor marked this entry with "References needed". In fact all the required references were present, but not necessarily in the "standard place" at the end of paragraphs. I've also added about 20 more references and removed the tag.
I have added a section on "Controversy" in line with a number of other entries, removing the unfortunate controversial publication from the "Work" section and rewriting. Evadeluge (talk) 07:58, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The recent so-called ‘edit’ by Axad12 is vandalism. It claims to have “removed extensive unsourced and self-sourced material” but this was not the nature of the entry, which was all based on public knowledge and fully referenced with extensive footnotes. It has taken a perfectly sound, comprehensive and succinct entry and turned it into a random mess. As a wiki ed with a particular interest in Aust music and no axe to grind, I have simply pressed ‘undo’ to revert it to its original state. And now Axad12 has reverted it back again to their vandalised version Ozrocka (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]