Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:22, 30 August 2007

Australia: Victoria / Politics Stub‑class Mid‑importance

2010 Victorian state election is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Mid-importance). Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Victoria. The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Proposed Deletion

Erechtheus proposes to delete this page. I understand that Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball, but I think it is relevant to create a page for the next election when the date is set and the contestants almost certain. Your comment that even the United States doesn't do this is incorrect - see United States Senate elections, 2010 as an example. We in Australia take our politics seriously as well. I'll let your message stand for a few days to see if anybody makes further comment. George1966 00:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

looks to me like Erechtheus is a serial tagger... i think the page should stay, it's relevant, especially with the by-elections coming up. there's too few pages on Vic politics as it is Kringle7 07 01:01, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I've been bold and removed the tag - WP:CRYSTAL is for events which may or may not happen - the election will happen. -Malkinann 01:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I do spend much of my time placing appropriate editorial templates on articles. Do you question that sort of contribution to this project? If so, perhaps you should review more policy. Improving the content we have is an essential part of making our encyclopedia a better reference. Erechtheus 01:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I support the proposed deletion. Please review WP:CRYSTAL I think this article falls into the category that little can be said that is verifiable and not original research. The article contains speculation about Labor politicians being elected in by-elections beforehand - likely perhaps but still specuulation. Similarly that Brumby will still be the premier in 2010 is speculation - a few weeks ago some assertion about 2010 could have been made with Bracks as premier as there were few if any clues he would resign.

As the tag has now been removed it will need to go to AfD - Malkinnann needs to read WP:Crystal more carefully - that an event will happen does not bring it outside the scope fo the policy.--Golden Wattle 01:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me the question is whether the article is going to stay in its present state until some time in 2009 or 2010 or whether it will take on the same character and referenced discussion the Senate election article linked above has. If any of you really believe it will take on that sort of character, I'm certainly okay with giving it a chance to blossom before taking it to AfD. I'm certain Australian politics can be very interesting, and I mean no offense to Victoria by placing the template -- I'd do the same if Virginia's 2009 state elections had an article I was aware of (I'll go look now), and I'm a proud resident of that Commonwealth. Erechtheus 01:21, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The intent was always for the article to evolve over the next three years. I created the article because I wanted to make a template that linked all of the Victorian elections, and I thought it a good idea to put in 2010 as well. The basic information I put in is just a starting point. I'm strongly against deletion on this basis. However, if the consensus is for deletion, I won't get in the way. George1966 01:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I certainly can't vouch for other editors, but I'm happy to see how this develops before taking the AfD step. I'm all for this becoming a nicely referenced and thoughtful discussion on an upcoming election. Even if it doesn't work out that way, perhaps we can at least find somewhere to redirect the title until an article would be more appropriate. Erechtheus 01:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

What do you suggest redirecting it to? I'm not sure that there is another title which is more appropriate. George1966 02:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

If it came down to it and the article just doesn't develop, I'd suggest a redirect to the Parliament article as a good place for a redirect. It could then be turned into an article when more information is available. There is no need to rush to take this action, though -- we can hopefully just see where this goes over the next month or two. Erechtheus 02:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:CRYSTAL, "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." I do not believe this article violates WP:CRYSTAL in any way However the 2007 by-elections are not relevant to this article and should be moved. Dbromage  05:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

By elections

We could at least put who wins the by elections here, and then see what else happens. -Malkinann 02:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree - this will be an important indication of support for the Government, and the event that will be looked back upon the most when the 2010 election is closer. I think the consensus here is to leave it for a couple of months - I'd suggest until after the Federal Election, when interest in state politics might be a bit higher. George1966 02:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I disagree - by elections 3 years away are not a predictor for the election in 2010 and should not be included in the article - they increase the speculation over the result when it is not justified.--Golden Wattle 03:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Mate, you are not contributing here. I accept that you are in favour of deleting the page, but haggling over events like by-elections does not contribute to the debate. Without a doubt the by-elections will be looked back upon as an indicator of Government support. I think that the consensus is to wait a few months and see if the article expands; if you disagree with this point only, say so. George1966 04:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I do not think Government support in 3 years time can be judged by by-elections held in September 2007 and the fact that the opposition do not field candidates in those seats. To include mention of the by elections draws an inappropriate connection and becomes speculation on the results in 2010 and thus against the policy at WP:Crystal - while the AfD will continue on its way, in the mean time speculation needs to be out of the article. The Herald Sun article covers the by election but makes no mention (unsurprisingly) of the 2010 election. I have thus again removed this relatively unrelated fact. --Golden Wattle 06:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

• Stub-Class Australia articles
• Mid-importance Australia articles
• Stub-Class Victoria articles
• Mid-importance Victoria articles
• WikiProject Victoria articles
• Stub-Class Australian politics articles
• Mid-importance Australian politics articles
• WikiProject Australian politics articles
• WikiProject Australia articles