Talk:Democratic Labor Party

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag Democratic Labor Party is part 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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.

What's this "was"? It still has a membership and formal structure, despite not being as active as it was and not having any remaining parliamentary representation.

Technically, the current DLP is not directly linked with the previous DLP as the party was wound up in 1978. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/23/1095651466663.html

The current party is a new party with the same name and some of the old participants. --Peacenik 11:56, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well, a few maybe. The old DLP people are pretty elderly now, and in fact many of them have gone back into the ALP. Most of the current DLP activists are zealous anti-abortionists in their 30s and 40s. Adam 15:12, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Two articles?

Since the DLP has now become a significant party in Victoria by winning a seat in the Leg Council, I think this article ought to be split in two - Democratic Labor Party (1955-78) and Democratic Labor Party, to distinguish the old party from the current one, which is not legally the same party. This pattern has been established with (oh! irony!) the old and new Communist Party of Australia. The Democratic Labor Party article then needs material about the current party's organisation, leadership, policies etc. Adam 23:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. PMA 01:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. --Matt 04:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Policy

I think the material under policy is more correctly an individual statement even if it reflects policy, clarification anyone --Matt 12:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)