Talk:Division of Herbert

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 Division of Herbert 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.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland.
This article is supported by WikiProject Townsville. (rated as mid importance)
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.
Assessment comments

[edit] Fiction

I've removed the following rubbish from the article:

Since the 1970s the Division of Herbert has always swung to the Government of the day, whether it be Liberal or Labor Party Representatives.

If that's true, one must wonder how the sitting government lost the seat at the 1996 election. Further, there was a pretty substational swing to the Opposition Labor Party in 1998.

The seat is currently held safely by the Liberal Party, as is Government.

Far from a safe seat, it's likely to be one of the most hotly contested at the next election. Dlw22 07:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


Dlw22, it might be more civil if you were to discuss removing other peoples edits before doing so, I particularly take offence at your calling a fact 'BS' and 'rubbish'.

The government changed in 1996.. and so did the seat of Herbert from Labor to Liberal... so how is that incorrect? also there was a substantial swing away from the Government in 1998, so that supports Herbert being a good reflection of federal swings. Perhaps the phrasing needs rewording:

Since the 1970s the Division of Herbert has always had a local member who is a member of the Government, whether it be Liberal or Labor Governments.

The seat is a 'safe' seat, as it is held by over 5%. So that fact is correct. That doesn't mean that it can't be won by Labor at the upcoming election, that's not the definition of safe, safe just means it is held by a significant amount of votes... Of course it's going to be hotly contested, because for Labor to win Government it would need a huge swing towards it, seats like Herbert will be crucial for a change in Government, however no matter what way you analyse the previous election results you have to admit that on the numbers the government is in a stronger position than any other government in recent history.

If the Election promises section for the Herbert Division doesn't belong in the Division of Herbert article where would you put it? It is well referenced and only states fact. WikiTownsvillian 08:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for your considered response WikiTownsvillian. I apologise for my harsh tone.

Onto the substantial matters:

1998 stands out as a clear contradiction to what was written. (1996 at best you could say it swung to the government in retrospect.)

Indeed you could say that the seat has been a bellwether for the past three decades. But this is not the same thing as 'swing'.

As to Herbert's status as a safe seat, I'll concede that an arbitrary 5% or 6% cut-off is often used to separate 'safe' from 'marginal' seats. But I find this rather crude. For one thing it fails to place the seat result in the broader context of the election.

More importantly though, many readers would equate 'safe' with unloseable. And clearly Herbert is not that sort of seat. Misleading terminology should be avoided.

As for the Election Promises section. To put it bluntly, I felt it trivial and un-encyclopedic. Dlw22 09:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dlw22, thank you as well for the more measured language, I must say that I do respect what you do on wikipedia, particularly at the Candidates for the 2007 election page. I had never heard of the word bellwether before, but having now read about it I agree that it is a much better way of describe the trend of Herbert voting patterns. I agree 'swing' wasn't a very concise word to use. I would be happy to replace 'The seat is currently held safely by the Liberal Party, as is Government.' to something I think you would be happier with, but will work on it tomorrow. Regarding the Election Promises section, do you feel the topic is trivial and un-encyclopaedic or the content? Obviously it is fairly light on content because there haven't been many election promises to this point in Herbert, however that will change over the next few months. As for the topic, I would have to defer to people who are more experienced than myself on that issue. I think an administrator could make that call or a consensus at WikiProject Australian politics. Thanks, WikiTownsvillian 10:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)