Talk:2009 Australian federal budget

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Australia / Politics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 2009 Australian federal budget 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (marked as High-importance).
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to for other than editorial assistance.

Various queries[edit]

Should there be a section on lost revenue? Should there be a section on policy being inplemented, to be (and when) Should there be a section on Politicking? Should there be a section on the Opposition budget reply on Thursday? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liberalcynic (talkcontribs) 15:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Considering lost revenue makes up the bulk of the deficit, there should definitely be a section on that. Timeshift (talk) 15:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely, we need to explain why the deficit occurred. We need to write something on that.--LostOverThere (talk) 06:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Could someone get these photos from the budget document on the page: - File:Http:// G 1.gif - File:Http:// G 2.gif —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liberalcynic (talkcontribs) 13:20, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

They're copyrighted photos/diagrams. Either someone will need to create their own diagram based on those on such as in MS Excel, or put them in to the article as text. Timeshift (talk) 13:30, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Crikey ref[edit]

I put in a ref from I assume that crikey is a WP:RS? --Surturz (talk) 03:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

In the past it hasn't been. But I would love to revisit the issue. Timeshift (talk) 04:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't think so either. As an ex-subscriber to Crikey, its editorial standards are very low and all the articles in it are basically opinion articles and hence not reliable sources for anything other than their authors' opinion. Nick-D (talk) 02:37, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on 2009 Australian federal budget. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:07, 18 June 2017 (UTC)