User talk:Frickeg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


there is more mythology involved in the early days of the green movement in tasmania than you could poke a campfire full of toasted cheese sandwiches - I reverted the wrong bit - cheers JarrahTree 06:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

blah blah ygm JarrahTree 06:14, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
saint B was not a founding UTG member JarrahTree 06:20, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Yeah I am not imputing your editing as mis-representing the B business - the email might explain part - more issues than a can of unsourced comments... JarrahTree 06:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Federal politicians[edit]

No worries! Not like it'll be a problem going anywhere any time soon. I'm just meandering through doing them amidst other projects, and trying to break up and expand some of the Psephos stubs a bit so they're a bit more easily editable than the one-paragraph ones.

I did try to add the auto-archiving thing a while ago but it didn't take for some reason (I hate fiddling with this stuff) - just gave it another try. The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:43, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Candidates articles[edit]

I know you tend to be the one to create candidate articles ie: Candidates of the South Australian state election, 2014 - an editor created a list at South Australian state election, 2018 so I created Candidates of the South Australian state election, 2018 and moved the contents there. Would you be willing to convert the contents to be in line with standard article layout? Timeshift (talk) 01:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree it is a bit early for a candidate article (though for state SA, perhaps not...?), however I had two choices - remove the candidate tables added by another user, or move them to the inevitable candidate article. Timeshift (talk) 08:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, Kandelaars/Hanson has had extremely little coverage indeed. When an appointment isn't the result of a scandal (Finnigan), incumbent MP death, or party affiliation change, there is so little content to put in to a typical media article you'd find today, that the lack of any of the three almost automatically consigns it out of the realm of the media/news outlets. As for many retiring MPs, it is mostly about party renewal for hasbeens (or in the case of the fourth-term Liberal opposition, hasbeens/neverwasbeens). And it's no coincidence that Atkinson and Rankine are leaving at the same time... I bet you didn't know they're a long-term couple. Timeshift (talk) 10:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Two SALC Libs to one SALC ALP can hardly be described as "better"... more "less worse" or "aberration". And Gago/Gazzola aside, remember that Malinauskas is also leaving the LC at the next election as he's moving to the seat of Croydon - so Labor's 2018 SALC ticket will notably be a completely new set of candidates. Timeshift (talk) 11:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Don Nardella succession[edit]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, and I take your point about long and short term succession being clear, but my understanding (and admittedly vague memory of the Victorian state election, 1999) was that Candy Broad succeeded Caroline Hogg who resigned mid-term, not Don Nardella who retired at the end of his term to contest Melton. My suspicion was that the member table for Melbourne North Province was the wrong way round and Nardella should be succeeded by Marsha Thomson, but I changed the succession to a two-member one on Nardella's article, intending to follow it up later. --Canley (talk) 02:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


Thanks! It's been interesting - PNG politics has a reputation for being hugely chaotic but I've been able to generally make sense of most of the significant party and parliamentary changes, and I thought I'd try and make it less of a sea of red ahead of elections in a couple months. The Drover's Wife (talk) 08:34, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Quick catch with Francis! I'd assumed he'd definitely scrape back over the line so that was a pleasant surprise. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Returning independent candidates (WA election)[edit]

Would you happen to know if there are any independent candidates at the 2017 WA election who ran in the same seats in 2013 (for calculating primary vote swings)? I know of one, Dave Schumacher in Dawesville, however I'm sure I identified at least one other at some point, but don't seem to have noted it down. --Canley (talk) 04:03, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Never mind, The Drover's Wife (talk · contribs) answered this for me, Jim Bivoltsis in Churchlands! --Canley (talk) 05:38, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Strikethrough for election results[edit]

Hi Frickeg. Any particular reason you don't like the strikethrough for election results? I can see why it is problematic in things like senate lists, but it seemed to me to be a useful way to deal with election results that were later changed by a court decision - perhaps that's a reflection of it being in common use in my work. It is not a major issue for me, but I am interested in understanding your perspective. Find bruce (talk) 05:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Progress party 1977[edit]

Actually in this case, my source says that everything works out like that for Everton and Flinders. In Everton, the candidate is listed as O.C. Pershouse (Owen Clark Pershouse), and the candidate for Flinders is listed as O.H. Pershouse (Owen Herbert Pershouse). I'm not entirely sure if that's right, it could be a typo, but, it's in Colin Hughes's book at the least. Kirsdarke01 (talk) 02:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Robert Staines[edit]

Thanks for your message. I'm pleased you are pleased and I'm sorry that you are struggling. Your vigilance in protecting notability standards is commendable. I clearly have a minority view of notability so do what you feel is necessary and I won't be offended. For me it seems odd to go to the bother of adding names of people who contest elections and hold public office and then deem them as non-notable. What is the point of having black/non-linked names in a list or article? The value of the alternative is that when linked the public can easily see the subject's other political and community activity. There is wide coverage of his political activities in central Queensland in the 1920s and '30s. His death in NSW is extensively covered in the press of two states. I had intended putting in more biographical detail when I found out his other terms as Chairman of Banana but at this stage I won't bother. It will be a shame if the public record of of a politically active Queenslander is deleted but that is probably inevitable. Castlemate (talk) 03:17, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

The obituary is from the Courier-Mail. Castlemate (talk) 05:33, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


WP:MOS was changed after an RFC about it in late 2016, so only about six months ago, but I only became aware of it last week. I have also created hundreds of such biographies like this, although I was never a big fan of the "hypocorism" style anyway, but I'm also a bit hesitant to do it as well which is why I only did two or three. I agree it's not clear what is a "common" or "obvious" hypocorism, and I would be inclined to leave what I consider to be uncommon ones like Mickey Dewar. --Canley (talk)

North Queensland Party[edit]

Thanks for that catch! Such a bizarre error, too, because it's not like Aikens was a quiet figure in minor party politics. I continue to be surprised at how amazingly inaccurate A Plague on Both Your Houses is - it's one of the most inaccurate published books about politics I've ever come across, which is so strange for something written by Dean Jaensch. The Drover's Wife (talk) 03:22, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure you're in the right with that new editor about the names - although he's making the wrong argument because he doesn't get WP:COMMONNAME, I think he might be right that they're the right names. John Rendell Street seems to turn up much more hits for that name (with "John Street" actually referring to his father), while George Kenyon Holden is preferred enough that "George Holden" "legislative council" turns up a person of the same name from the St Arnaud Rifle Club in the first page of Google. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:38, 5 June 2017 (UTC)


At this stage I am in process of writing a report about discussions in Australia about the cycle 2 of the broader wikimedia strategy -

You may well have responded elsewhere - but if you at all interested - not the slightest bother if you are not - please feel free to contact on or off wiki - thanks JarrahTree 04:11, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Term dates[edit]

Hey, I'm not sure where to find this and I figured you might have an idea - which date do you use for MPs when you're adding terms to infoboxes, etc? I'd like to roll them out for the PNG MPs, but I get confused between election day/return of writs/swearing in/etc., and it's complicated more there by PNG holding elections over several days. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:14, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Argh, I'd forgotten that the parliamentary site had dates - which complicates the heck out of things, because they use swearing-in dates that are different for nearly every member. They've only had this info since 2013, which means I'm never going to be able to find the exact dates for anyone who wasn't elected in this term of parliament. I wonder if it might be necessary to just use months for anyone before that. The Drover's Wife (talk) 16:00, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

WA results[edit]

Fair call on Albury, but where there was a 2PP count done in 2013 (adjusted for redistributions), the swing was calculated from that. Do you disagree? --Canley (talk) 12:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I was referring to this edit. You've changed the swing in the 2PP count where Labor was not in the 2CP count in 2013? What I was saying was that swing was based on the 2013 notional 2PP count between LIB and ALP. --Canley (talk) 12:25, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Ah, you're right (sorry, it is late), and I'm not sure what happened as the results tables in the district articles seem to be the same as what you have done here which is odd as they would have been generated the same way. Can you double check Kwinana though? --Canley (talk) 12:51, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I'll double check them all tomorrow. First three and last one (Albany, Baldivis, Central Wheatbelt, NW Central) are all good I think, I've got some doubts about Geraldton, Kalgoorlie and Kwinana but I'll have to rummage through a few things to work it out and I'm too tired to do it now. --Canley (talk) 13:06, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
I've changed Geraldton and Kalgoorlie where there was a 2PP count/estimate in Green's redistribution margin calculations (although Geraldton was wrong in the results list but not in the district article, the ALP/LIB swing was 21.5). I'll check them all on the weekend against the new Analysis of Results published this morning! --Canley (talk) 22:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Early political parties[edit]

Hey, before I forget - remembering old discussions on here, I recently picked up a bunch of old books on the formation of political parties in general and the Labor Party in particular - is there anything you'd like me to dig up? I'm about to be super busy for a few months so I just thought I'd mention it. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:06, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

This book has about 70 pages on the development of the Victorian party system generally, so I'll jump in and have a read when I get the chance. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

T. J. Ryan[edit]

Well, I didn't know the guy personally but he is always called T.J. Ryan here in sunny Queensland (and I've chalked up quite a few decades here). I'd have to stop and think for a while to even remember what T.J. stood for. Certainly his biographers favour T.J. Ryan, compare


or repeat the same pair of searches on google.

My preference would be to stick with T.J. Ryan on the common name principle even though it is not consistent with other Qld MLAs. Kerry (talk) 07:04, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I can be a bit gung-ho about these things and already moved it back, but yes, Kerry is right about this one. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:20, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
I think in modern usage it's not inconsistent: Billy Hughes is pretty much always referred to as that these days unless someone's being specifically very formal, and Stanley Bruce has four times as many Google hits at that name than for SM or Stanley Melbourne. TJ Ryan has several times more Google hits than "Tom Ryan", and HV Evatt is even further out - "HV Evatt" has more than ten times the Google hits than "Bert Evatt" and "Herbert Evatt" and five times as many as "Herbert Vere Evatt". The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:51, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Qld MLA/MLC stubs[edit]

I should have thought of this earlier, but didn't. As you seem to be looking at Qld parliamentarians at the moment, if you see any that are minimal stubs in terms of actual article content like William Little (politician), can you draw my attention to them. The easiest way for me is if you dump them in the bottom of my To-Do list but any way you want to do it works for me. My intention is not so much that I want to work on them myself but that I am always in need of topics to use in edit training. I find the safest way to do edit training is to find a group of very under-developed stubs where I know there is good source information available (so the edit training session is not spent doing research but actually adding content with citations). Qld MLA/MLCs are very good topics for this purpose as there is almost always something about each of them on the Queensland Parliament's Former Members database plus if they oblige me by dying before 1955, there is usually a newspaper obituary in Trove or if later, I can often pick up an obituary in Hansard. So if you should stumble over any, I'd appreciate knowing. The hardest thing about edit training these days is coming up with the articles to practice on as I want to avoid large articles with huge numbers of page watchers as the trainees need to have a postive experience at training (go home and show family/friends "look I did this!") and page watchers seem to enjoy beating up the newbies, which isn't a positive experience. Note, I don't cover infoboxes in introductory training so I'm interested in articles with little narrative content (the existence or magnificence of the infobox is irrelevant to my needs). And I never do BLP with trainees so living politicans are out too. Thanks if you can help. Kerry (talk) 07:40, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

No worries if you've moved on. I don't use Qld topics because of my own interests, but rather because I do training in Queensland and using local topics means trainees (who are mostly middle-aged and older) have familiarility with the topic space even though the actual subject may not known to them, which means the time is spent on the Wikipedia side of things rather on the learning/researching. E.g. I don't have to explain to Queenslanders that we have no upper house. I took a look at your SA parliamentarians as a possibility but I see what you mean about their former members website -- it is pretty sparse. To be honest we don't add that much content during training sessions, it's more that I hope that for someone in the room, I light a fire in them and they become active in an ongoing way. To be honest, I am not sure that I ever had much success when training with the source editor, but the Visual Editor has been a game changer. People find it so much more intuitive. People find stuff like headings, character formatting, bullet lists, tables etc sufficiently similar to most word processors that I just skim over it briefly and make wikilinks and citations the main focus of the training. Being able to reuse a citation with copy-and-paste within and between articles is also very intuitive to them (the VE is smart with copy and paste of citations, so you don't have to worry about whether, under the hood, you are copying the original citation or a re-use, it just works!). I am seeing people I've trained on VE popping up on my watchlist more and more (and obviously others may be active on articles outside of my areas of interest), so it does make me feel more hopeful for the future. Kerry (talk) 23:32, 5 August 2017 (UTC)