Talk:Candidates of the Victorian legislative election, 2006

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Candidates of the Victorian legislative election, 2006 article.
Article policies
Flag
Portal
 Candidates of the Victorian legislative election, 2006 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.
List This page is a list and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.
Image:Splitsection.svg This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, Victorian legislative election, 2006, due to size or style considerations.

Joe Helper is an ALP candidate not a Liberal candidate Neil Repacholi is a Liberal candidate not a Greens candidate

Thanks for fixing that. Looks to have been an error in the table. Rebecca 01:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] People Power Candidates

I've noticed that People Power are constantly changing candidates for various electorates.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.29.131.4 (talk • contribs) UTC 09:28, 7 August 2006.

[edit] Retiring MPs

Didn't anyone else have a problem with the "Retiring MPs" section making statements like "Bundoora Labor MLA and Minister for Community Services Sherryl Garbutt is retiring. She will be replaced by Minister for Sport and Recreation Justin Madden, who currently serves in the Legislative Council." (emphasis added)? I thought the purpose of an election was for the electorate to decide who will be their MP (safe seat or not), and this wording seems to suggest that because someone is preselected they will automatically be elected. Blarneytherinosaur 08:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Assume good faith. I hadn't thought of that at all when I added the section, and I'm glad you picked it up and fixed it. Rebecca 10:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't want to sound superior or put people down, but I think we need to tread carefully and get things right regarding elections. Blarneytherinosaur 02:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
MLAs are not "replaced" until after the election so I think the your clarification is important. However, recent edits by 144.138.196.103 (I have reverted) attempted to reinstate the "replace" terminology - and removed most of the Greens candidates. --Peter Campbell 23:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Outcome of Legislative Council election

Is it the job of Wikipedia to attempt to call the outcome of likely winners of the elections for the upperhouse? As it is using a system that has never been used before in the state, so it is going to be fairly hard to call. I don't dispute that there should be some method of suggesting the major candidates from the others but predicting the outcome is a step too far. 61.68.170.199 07:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

It isn't really predicting the outcome. Most of the names in bold are contesting seats just about universally agreed to be safe for whatever party. Rebecca 00:22, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] greens candidates

Who keeps on removing the Greens candidates? I spent the whole day updating the Greens candidate and someone has deleted them. Someone put them back on.203.213.97.110 23:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I have already reinstated them once. I think there is a vandal at work. You can check the edit history from the History tab at the top of the article, and revert to the pre-vandalised version. I will check this out. Your edits will not be lost --Peter Campbell 02:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of content with dubious edit comments

Recent edits by 144.138.196.120 have removed valid and fairly recent information on preselection of candidates - which looks to me like an attempt to sanitize some of the content on preselection. I will restore the content in question. --Peter Campbell 10:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Western Metropolitan Region

It is quite likely that Labor will get 4 candidates elected unless the Libs preference the Greens before Labor and they all go that way. Xtra 07:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it. The quota for that would be over 66%. They only got around 62% last time and will probably get less this time. See this [1] Teiresias84 08:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I would read it as likely Labor to get 4. With a Quota of 16.666, the primary in the 2002 election got Labor further into its first Quota than either the greens are into their first, or Liberals are into their second. (ALP 3Quotas + .75, Libs 1Q+.52, Grn 0Q+0.59%). The ALP are definitely in front. The ‘others’ column in that part of the world generally with preference Labor, and the Libs and Greens are very unlikely to preference each other. The only way the ALP does not get it is if a) the ALP surplus is smaller than both the Liberal and Green surplus OR b) the Libs and Greens do a preference deal, and the libs come third. If the Greens are third it does not matter because their people won’t follow a how to vote card, and will preference ALP anyway. PfkaH 05:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] people power and family first

{{help}} In Upper House Candidate table, can someone pls make two columns for People Power candidates and Family First candidates

[edit] Group Voting Tickets

GVT's have come out. If anyone can work out what they mean. I read through, but they make no sense to me. Xtra 09:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update

Who won? Shouldn't this article be written in the past tense? --Umalee 02:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)