Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian politics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Steelkamp (talk | contribs) at 05:10, 25 March 2022 (requested move). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAustralia: Politics Project‑class
WikiProject iconWikiProject Australian politics 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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This page is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

Electoral district disambiguation

Relevant discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#Electoral district disambiguation jnestorius(talk) 20:09, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See 1931 Australian federal election and 1921 Victorian state election for example - links to Country Party etc in the infobox are now displaying as "National". Anyone know what's gone wrong? Ivar the Boneful (talk) 10:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's using the new Module:Political party. I've tried a few edits to Module:Political party/C (adding shortname entries and the 1920 Country Party) to try and fix it but it hasn't worked (maybe it will eventually). According to some editors, this module is the best thing ever, is really easy to use, and should replace all other name/colour/link templates as soon as possible, but all I've ever seen are problems caused by trying to jam everything into a global module reading from massive data pages, with little concern about what it breaks, and no tangible benefits demonstrated. --Canley (talk) 11:21, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should bring it up to the global platform somehow (maybe the talk page)? These pro-one system people will never know about these issues and they will never get fixed unless we bring it up. Marcnut1996 (talk) 11:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Family First Party (2021)

I see there is a new Family First Party (2021). @Canley: has added it to {{Australian politics/name}} however there doesn't seem to be a colour as yet. Any suggestions? --Find bruce (talk) 02:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since the policies of the new Family First Party seem to be similar to the old one, I don't see a reason why it should be a different colour from its old one, which was #00CCFF. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 12:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I know very little about SA politics, is this party a continuation of at least some politicians and structures of the previous party, or is it it's own distinct party? There are precedents from the Australian Democrats and Democratic Labour Party to have the continuation party included on the page. Catiline52 (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Democrats have always been the same party. Dropping off the register is not the same thing as dissolving and there's a clear organisational continuity even if there was a big shift in the membership. The DLP also have a continuous line since the 1950s. This new Family First looks like a new organisation that has revived a brand with recognition & loyalty rather than the old party unmerging out of the ashes of the Australian Conservatives. Timrollpickering (talk) 13:53, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be better if the new Family First had a slightly different colour to the old one as this is a relaunch rather than a continuation. Frickeg (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with a slightly different colour, especially since the new party seems to be founded by former Labor Party people, and there isn't complete agreement between this version and the old version, it doesn't seem right to treat it as a true continuation. Dauwenkust (talk) 06:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alright then. In that case, how about using #5A58A6 as the colour? It would match its official logo on its website, and purplish colouring seems to be used often for christian political parties. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 23:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me - would give    Family First --Find bruce (talk) 21:44, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. If everyone's fine with that, could someone please have a go at adding the color? I've had an attempt myself, but can't seem to get the coding right on the political colors page. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 10:04, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've added it to the colour template. --Canley (talk) 10:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Country Party breakaways in 1930s-1940s

I'm looking through UWA election page (noting it's not accurate, as pointed out by members of this wikiproject) and this results page from APH, I noticed that in 1934 Australian federal election, there is an "Australian Country Party" in Victoria (see also UWA - 1934 Senate Victoria). What is this party, is it a breakaway and should it be counted as part of the coalition in the results statistics in the election page?

Separate to the above, I know that in 1943 Australian federal election, there is a Queensland Country Party in Queensland which is a breakaway that refused to join the Country-National Organisation. From the UWA site (1943 HoR results - Qld), one person from this breakaway was elected to the lower house. I could not figure out from Results of the 1943 Australian federal election (House of Representatives)#Queensland on who this could be. I also note that Wide Bay had two Country Party candidates, which means one of them must be from the breakaway.

And if we have more details about this Queensland Country Party, then I am thinking of setting it as a new article (currently a redirect) and describe it as a breakaway that refused to join the merged Country-UAP/Nationalist. It will consist of two breakway periods:

If anyone could help with the above, that would be great. Marcnut1996 (talk) 23:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've got Colin A. Hughes' Handbook of Australian Government and Politics 1890–1964 in front of me, and here's what it says about the 1934 election: "The U.A.P. and Country Party ran joint Senate teams, but competed in a number of House seats. In Victoria the Country Party executive sought a pledge from candidates to follow caucus decisions; federal members refused to give such a pledge, and pro-executive candidates nominated against them as Australian Country Party candidates." --Canley (talk) 00:53, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the 1943 Queensland one, here's the summary from Hughes: "The Opposition parties were led by Fadden as Country Party leader; W. M. Hughes was officially leader of the U.A.P. but Menzies was unofficially regarded as leader by some U.A.P. candidates. In Queensland the U.A.P. and that element of the Country Party (led by Fadden) disposed to close association with it ran together as the Country-National Party, but co-operated with the remainder of the Country Party. The number of independent candidates was unusually large." Also, Hughes says that the seat won by the Queensland Country Party was Maranoa, so that would be Charles Adermann. --Canley (talk) 01:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info @Canley:, am I right to say that the Queensland Country Party in 1943 should technically be part of the Coalition, just that they decided to run independently but with co-operation from the CNO? And for the 1936 one, it acts more like a temporary breakaway but still part of the Coalition too? Just thinking how we can incorporate these information into the respective state National Party articles and the two elections. Marcnut1996 (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 March 2022

– Division should not be capitalised as it is not a proper noun. For example: Profile of the electoral division of Pearce (WA) on the AEC website. Steelkamp (talk) 05:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]