Talk:Hal Porter

Australia: Melbourne / Literature Low‑importance

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

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal 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 arts and entertainment work group (assessed as Low-importance).

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hal Porter. 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/20070928205542/http://www.hillofcontentbookshop.com/pages/Competition.html to http://www.hillofcontentbookshop.com/pages/Competition.html

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) 16:36, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Corroborative evidence for paedophilia allegation

I am just wondering if anyone knows of any corroborative evidence for the allegations of paedophilia raised by Mary Lord? I should say that, by this, I don't merely mean other sources which reference the Mary Lord allegations. Research17 (talk) 01:25, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot locate any corroborative evidence of the Lord allegations. Given that Wikipedia is based upon fact rather than allegations, I thought it prudent to remove the allegations from the article. Now, I am aware that Porter may well have been a paedophile, although the problem is that this was never tested in court, and indeed the man is now not able to defend himself. If Porter were still alive, the allegations would be probably defamatory, notwithstanding the purported long-standing friendship between Lord and Porter. What I've done is to simply make reference to the controversial 1993 biography. It should not be too difficult for any reader to work out what made the bio controversial. Let me know if you don't think this is reasonable. Research17 (talk) 21:32, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]