Talk:List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Politics and Government (Rated FL-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Featured list FL  This article has been rated as FL-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Australia / Politics (Rated FL-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition 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.
Featured list FL  This article has been rated as FL-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (marked as Top-importance).
 
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Politics (Rated FL-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.
Featured list FL  This article has been rated as FL-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

This article has an assessment summary page.
Featured list List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
May 16, 2007 Featured list candidate Promoted
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition:
  • Continue to update list when necessary.

Date formats[edit]

How can this possibly be seen as a model for others when the date formats are wrong? Surely featured articles and lists should have every detail of wikistyle correct? --Pete 02:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Sofixit.--cj | talk 05:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Will do, but I think the point needs to be made. If you are working on a featured article or list, check all the details. --Pete 21:26, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Eh???[edit]

Um, I added the pictures of those who werent there (leaving reappearances blank obviously) a few days ago and now they arent there and theres no history with my name on it... I swear I didn't dream it, I think theres a wiki bug... Timeshift 04:40, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

It's possible that your edit didn't save. To my understanding, the servers have been struggling over the last few weeks, and the database has been locking every so often to let them catch up.--cj | talk 05:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Just be careful, however, this article originally had a picture for all of them, however a lot of them had to be removed for copyright reasons. .....Todd#661 11:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Notes uplinks not working[edit]

When you click on a, b or c, it does not move back up to the text in the article. Needs a clever person to fix (I'm too lazy to work it out). —Moondyne 07:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Stat[edit]

The following was added to the lead: Of the 29 people who have served as Leaders of the Opposition, 15 served terms as Prime Ministers. I am going to look for an exact citation for this. In the meantime I am going to leave it here. If somebody else finds it, I believe it needs to be added to paragraph 3 in an appropriate position. .....Todd#661 12:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Todd, the statement doesn't really need a citation as its just a statement of fact based on the names in Category:Australian Leaders of the Opposition and Category:Prime Ministers of Australia. —Moondyne 12:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree it doesn't really need one as it's a non-contentious and very easily checked statement. There is however a reference here: "To 2001, there have been 35 Leaders of the Opposition. Of the 35, eight held the office more than once. Fifteen of them also served as Prime Minister." --Canley (talk) 02:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Prime Minister?[edit]

Is it just me, or do you guys here think we should add a column that in some way indicates whether the person listed was ever made a Prime Minister also? I think this would be an appropriate thing to list, as most of them would have at least wanted to be PMs, so to indicate whether they "made it", so to speak, would be worthy of note. --lincalinca 12:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

This information is included in the list. Although it is very subtle. The [a] & [b] notes indicate if they had been or did become prime minister. .....Todd#661 09:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Hmm.... too subtle in my opinion. I came here specifically ask the exact same question and I didn't even notice the 'a' and 'b' notes. I would agree that it would be nice to add a column that incorporated the knowledge described in the 'a' and 'b' notes - basically a column describing the form in which the person lost or attained the opposition leadership - it shouldn't be necessary to list both lost AND attained as the following/preceding leader's description will explain that. For example: Kim Beazly*replaced, Kevin Rudd*became PM, Brendan Nelson*replaced, Malcom Turnbull*incumbent. Witty Lama 06:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Recent changes to text[edit]

I've reverted changes that were made to the opening paragraphs. Admittedly I may be a bit biased because I wrote it originally, however it is better because of the following:

  • The revised versions opening paragraph consists of 1 sentance. This is not FL quality.
  • The text went through FLC. I can understand that it constantly needs to be improved upon, however you are 1 person and you have not consulted with anybody. FLC was a consultation with several editors. At least have it checked by somebody. I have reverted. I would appreciate it if you revert it again can you at least tell me why you made the improvements? .....Todd#661 10:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)


I appreciate it's hard to tell from the diff just what my changes were. I had no control over that. So I'll explain them here:

(A) The opening sentence "This is a List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition, who in Australian Federal Politics is a Member of Parliament in the House of Representatives" was not grammatical.

  • "... Leaders of the Opposition, who ... is a Member of Parliament in the House of Representatives"
    should at the very least be:
  • "... Leaders of the Opposition, who ... are Members of Parliament in the House of Representatives.

But even that’s crappy writing, because it could suggest there are multiple leaders at any one time. It also could be read that all the Leaders we've ever had since 1901 are still members of the current parliament. Far better to state what the list is about ("This is a List of ..."), and then, in a separate sentence, explain what office each of them must hold to qualify.

(B) "Member of Parliament in the House of Representatives" is not a standard expression. Being a member of the House of Reps makes one a member of parliament, so all we need to say is "Member of the House of Representatives".

(C) "List of Australian Leaders of the Opposition" is ambiguous, because it could refer to all the state and federal leaders of the Opposition throughout Australia, of which there are 9 at any one time. This list is about the leader in the Federal Parliament only, so we should make that explicit. You’ve tried to compensate by introducing the term "in Australian Federal Politics", but that’s a long way round, and it introduces an additional ambiguity. The phrase "who in Australian Federal Politics is a Member of Parliament in the House of Representatives" could be interpreted that in some other context the Leader is not necessarily an MP.

I’ve resolved all these issues by:

  • This is a List of Australian Leaders of the Federal Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition is a Member of the House of Representatives. (I made a new para after the 1st sentence, but you needn't break the para if that's an issue.)

On reflection, it would be even better to say:

  • "This is a List of Leaders of the Opposition in the Australian Federal Parliament. The Leader of the Opposition is a Member of the House of Representatives ...".

(D) "When in Parliament the Leader of the Opposition sits on the left-hand side of ..."

  • That’s ambiguous. From the point of view of the reader, who’s looking at the pic, it would be read as if they sit on the reader’s left, but we know that’s not the case, because the sides on which the government and the opposition sit are always defined from the Speaker’s perspective, who's facing the reader. So I made that clear by "When in Parliament the Leader of the Opposition sits (from the Speaker's viewpoint) on the left-hand side of ..."

(E) I changed "the table in the centre" to "the central table" (sounds more professional; I'm sure there's an even better formal name for it, though)

(F) "The Liberal Party have been in opposition ...

  • I changed "have" to "has".

(G) " ... since losing the 2007 election to the Labor Party who had been the opposition from 1996 to 2007". I reduced this to:

  • "... since losing the 2007 election to the Labor Party who had formed the opposition since 1996".

This gets the message across more concisely.

(H) "To date there have been thirty-one Opposition Leaders, sixteen of which have served terms as Prime Minister".

  • I changed "which" to "whom", since we’re talking about live human beings here. -- JackofOz (talk) 14:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

File:Bill Hayden.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Bill Hayden.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:19, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Franktudor.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Franktudor.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:11, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Arthur Calwell 2.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Arthur Calwell 2.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:09, 1 December 2011 (UTC)