I've just archived historic talk page content and the reason that the 2007 discussion above hasn't been archived is that I have some further thoughts on this. As a result of the above, we now have pages for all the governments since 1890, which is great! The following template goes with it:
Obviously, we've had governments prior to 1890, before political parties had come into being. These governments are usually called ministries, based on the premier's name, and sometimes the name of the two leading figures. For example, the first of those ministries was the Bell– Sewell Ministry, and my thoughts are that we should have pages for those governments, too. So, how about we call the first one Bell–Sewell Ministry? I propose that we use a hyphen without spaces between names, and use a capital M for Ministry in this case. What are your thoughts? Schwede 66 03:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok, here's my attempt at this. One of the things that need sorting is that some ministries are not unambiguous, see for example Fox. The other thing that needs discussing is that the list below is derived from King's Penguin History of New Zealand, and the years and ministries might not necessarily align with the entries on the various premier pages (e.g. Atkinson is shown by King with two Ministries for 1876):
Should these simply be added in front of the governments that are already in the template, or do we do something else? It's not directly comparable, as the First Liberal is broken down by King into the various ministries, e.g. Balance (1891-93), Seddon (1893-1906) and so on. Schwede 66 19:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I've been working on the Bell–Sewell Ministry and the link points to my userspace. If you have a look at the draft, you'll see that there's lots of historical context, but I haven't been able to find much substance on the Ministry itself. Please feel free to chip in. The reward is DYK credit (apart from filling a big gap in our political history). Before I'm happy with the quality of the article, I'd like to add a bit more substance to it. If need be, I start going through articles in Papers Past.
I've had some lingering doubts that maybe Ministry shouldn't be capitalised. But that's resolved now, as I've had a look at Ministry (collective executive) and the lists that are linked to that article. Ministry shall have a capital M.
The government template needs to be updated and an incomplete draft is in my userspace. Working on this, I've come to the conclusion that we don't just need to add the responsible governments starting with Bell–Sewell, but we should really (ultimately) also cover Fitzgerald's first executive, and the second one by Forsaith. So, what I've done is to allow for three groups in the template. What I'm struggling with is what to call these groups. Have a look whether you think the labels are appropriate. And the bigger question of course is whether breaking this into three groups is the most sensible way to do it. And whilst you are at it, is Fitzgerald Executive as opposed to Fitzgerald Ministry a suitable way of distinguishing this from the responsible government that started with Bell–Sewell?
That's it from me. I'd appreciate your feedback. And as I say, your additions to draft material in my userspace are most welcome. Schwede 66 02:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
User:Schwede66/Contributions/Template:Governments of New Zealand
See my sandbox for a list of Ministries from Wilson page 59-98. It uses the titles from Wilson eg Fox Ministry, 1856 rather than Fox Ministry or First Fox Ministry, as I wish to finish the list and make into a Wikipedia article before the book is due back at the library. The Ministry title above (eg "Fox Ministry") could be added for the pre-1890 ones that are likely to have an article on them. Wilson goes to the "Lange Ministry, 1984" and presumably it could be continued to the present. Hugo999 ( talk) 23:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Excellent work, Hugo. To make this a bit easier, here's a copy of the beginning of the list from your sandbox, and then the same list with redlinks, so that we know what we are talking about in detail. I don't mind to use this system in lieu of the above. Whatever system we agree on, can I suggest that it resides on this page?
Here's Hugo's list:
Here's my suggestion of particular article names:
The differences are:
Is this generally acceptable? And regarding the comment "pre-1890 ones that are likely to have an article", I envisage that there will eventually be an article for every single one of them. Schwede 66 03:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
What are we going to do about the local body elections this year? It would be good if we get all the (at least mayoral) results onto WP this time. If we do this, will we put them on the New Zealand local elections, 2010 (that seems like it will overload the page, though) and/or individual results on each article (eg Mayor of Auckland) under an "Election results" section like in electorates (see eg Hamilton East (New Zealand electorate)) and/or create a page for each election in each authority (eg Auckland mayoral election, 2010) and have council results there, too. Please share your thoughts and other suggestions, Adabow ( talk) 06:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
We have a list of New Zealand by-elections and I've been adding to it as I work my way through the Canterbury parliamentary history of 19th century. The list is nowhere near complete, but it's getting very long, with 148 entries, most of them redlinks. I wonder whether it needs a bit more structure. Well, in my opinion, it does, the question is how?
We have Category:By-elections in New Zealand results templates, which lists the by-elections by decade. So far, there are only seven of those templates. And for completeness, there is Category:By-elections in New Zealand, which lists all the by-elections that have their own pages (so far, we have 27 pages in that category).
One way to structure this could be to list by-elections by parliamentary term. So there could be a heading First Parliament over the by-elections that happened before we voted for the second parliament and so on. We could then have a template for that parliamentary term. I envisage the template to be used on all the electorate that had a by-election during that term, plus of course on all the by-elections of that term themselves.
A problem with having templates by decade is that some parliamentary terms are across two decades. So if we were to include templates with those electorate pages that have had by-elections, some of them would have two templates.
I appreciate that by-elections are becoming a bit less frequent under MMP, and there weren't any in the 46th and 48th term. So maybe we should have one template for 1996 onwards.
What do others think? Schwede 66 00:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
User:Schwede66/Sandbox/Template:NZ by-elections, 5th Parliament hashad (now
published) an attempt of a template.
Schwede
66
20:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
By trawling through historic electorate and ex-MPs I've found many more by-elections - some listed, some implied (by dates that didn't accord with general elections). So far only covered known early electorates (some election pages do not list electorates) and only up to 1890. While some may have been presumed according to poor data I have identified a possible 144 by-elections so far unrecorded at List of New Zealand by-elections. I'm guessing the 1887 introduction of a £10 candidate's deposit was intended to halt this 19th C. version of waka-jumping. For my list see my NZ elections talk page. Fanx ( talk) 15:47, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
I've moved an article about the 3rd New Zealand Parliament into mainspace. It's by no means complete and can do with further input. I'll put some thoughts onto the talk page. Schwede 66 23:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
while assessing articles I've noticed a trend in politics articles to have well-developed prose articles (otherwise easily C and often B class) with absolutely no references. Going back and fixing these should be a priority. For examples, see some of the high-importance start-class articles. dramatic ( talk) 13:31, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Election pages use colours for parties. Is there an overview page somewhere with links to all the relevant templates? Schwede 66 00:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
This page has a whole bunch of them for different shades. -- Andrensath ( talk | contribs) 05:50, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I've started shifting general election results into a template, and then referencing the info back into the article. I've done this for two reasons:
If you want to have a look, here are the relevant links for the 1st Parliament as an example:
I'm starting the work on the 4th Parliament now, putting the election results together first. Schwede 66 04:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I've only just realised that we have two project pages, with this one using Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand/politics, and the second one using the same name, but a capital P for Politics. I'll shift the content of that page across to this one, and will redirect it. Some good work has been done there about organising photos. Schwede 66 19:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I've recently joined this project. I have noticed that the leads for articles about New Zealand general elections are written in a lot of different ways. I think they should all be consistent. I have started changing them accordingly, modelling them after that for the 1993 election, but my changes at one article (for the 2005 election) were reverted. I think agreement needs to be reached on how to rewrite these articles. Linbit ( talk) 07:22, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Just drawing your attention to the proposal of having Māori seats moved – comment if you wish. Schwede 66 23:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
In the article on by-elections, it gives the following definition: "By-elections in New Zealand occur to fill vacant seats in the New Zealand Parliament. The death, resignation, or expulsion of a sitting electorate MP can cause a by-election." No trouble with that.
We do, however, have other cases and I'm not sure whether they are by-elections, some kind of special election, or a kind of general election that happens at a different time to the main election. And if it's not a by-election, then it shouldn't be listed on that particular page, but would need its own article. Those cases are when new electorates get created during the term of a parliament. So far, I've come across the following instances:
There might have been something else like this going on during the 4th Parliament, as the number of representatives increased from 70 to 76, and only 4 of those were made up by the new Māori electorates.
So, are those elections for new electorates by-elections? If not, what are they? Schwede 66 01:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, Hugo. Schwede 66 04:36, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I came here after a note on my talk page from Schwede66, possibly cos I do a lot of work on UK MPs and elections, and have done a lot of similar work on Irish politics. So here's my thoughts FWIW:
Hope this helps! -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Editor Schwyz, who appears to be doing a lot of category work on provinces all around the world, has moved New Ulster, New Munster and New Leinster to new article names, adding 'Province'. His rationale was to have them "like others in Category:Provinces of New Zealand. He's also changed the template that goes with this.
I've left a note on his talk page:
First of all, thanks for not just moving the articles, but to then also tidy up the respective template. But it would have been much more appropriate if you had dropped a note on the talk page of one of the articles, or gone to the NZ politics taskforce (as per the banners on the talk pages) with this proposal first. The difference between these first three Provinces, and the later 10 Provinces, is that the names of the later Provinces are still in use these days, so the articles do need that disambiguation, whereas the first three names are not in use at all. So if you had asked, we would probably have come to the conclusion of not moving the articles.
So what do you think? My feeling is to revert those changes. Schwede 66 00:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a move proposal for Ted Howard affecting this project and it hasn't as yet created much interest. I invite you to have a look at this. Schwede 66 04:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Editor Good Olfactory is currently doing a lot of good work on categories. I wonder, though, whether we can have a discussion on this here before new aspects get started, to avoid having to rename categories, and to ensure that his thoughts align with those of members of this group. I for one am not sure whether we should have categories 'New Zealand MPs by xyz city' (as they have been created) or 'New Zealand MPs by xyz region'. And if the latter, should we be using the current regions, or the historic regions? Up to (at least) 1876, all the political reporting was based on the provinces, but that of course changed at some point. If we go for current regions, than we might end up with a 'strange home' for some historic politicians, i.e. regions that never existed when they were around.
I have invited Good Olfactory to comment here. One of the categories that is a bit of a mess is mayors and I'd be glad if we could tidy that up, too. Schwede 66 22:06, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi team, over the last few months, I've been working my way through the early political history. We've had articles for each electorate since earlier this year (thanks to Hugo999), and I've added the 3rd to 10th Parliament (the latter ones are just stubs). Up to 1890, election articles have infoboxes for easier navigation. And whilst I'm working my way through the election results (I'm currently working on the 1871 template), I'm tidying up the electorate articles. By way of example, they go from rather incomplete to something that covers the whole period including a nice table. Dunedin took forever to sort out; they went crazy down there when the Central Otago Gold Rush hit and were creating new electorates left, right and centre, transferring MPs from one electorate to another without by-elections, and it's all reasonably poorly documented in the standard textbooks. To go from this to what it looks these days took many, many hours. And in the process of sorting out electorates, I've been working with Hugo999 to get stubs set up for the missing 19th century MPs.
So whilst there are a good number of electorate articles that have yet to be prettied up, I think we've got at least lists of all the MPs compiled with each article. At this point, I'm not aware of any missing MPs or redlinks. If you spot any gaps, let us know, but chances are that we have at least stubs for each NZ MP! I think the list is complete. That's reason to pause and feel good about ourselves. And please note that Hugo999 would have set up something like 90% of the stubs during 2010, so please give credit where it's due. Schwede 66 05:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
There's a discussion at Template talk:Historic electorates of New Zealand about what to include and what not include with the template. Can you please join in? Schwede 66 18:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Created page New Zealand supplementary elections and edited electorate pages that referenced these as by-elections. Fanx ( talk) 11:28, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
I created Suburbs of Auckland (New Zealand electorate) as a separate page rather than a REDIRECT to Auckland Suburbs (New Zealand electorate). These were quite clearly two different electorates, separated by time (1853–60) & (1928–46) respectively, and also by location — in the first instance (Suburbs of Auckland) was what is now the inner city suburbs (roughly Ponsonby to Parnell via Mt Eden), while Auckland Suburbs was to the West (roughly the current Te Atatū, Waitakere and parts of New Lynn electorates). Fanx ( talk) 22:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Can anyone work out where the NZ Parlboxes of Ann Batten, Tuariki Delamere, Jack Elder, Tau Henare, Tuku Morgan and Rana Waitai are getting there awful shading backgrounds from? As far as I know they should come from Template:Mauri_Pacific/meta/shading and Template:Te_Tawharau/meta/shading, neither of which exist. Te Tawharau doesn't even have a Template:Te_Tawharau/meta/color. What have I missed? Mattlore ( talk) 20:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I suggest that we:
I was getting a white bgcolor thanks to Firefox, so I didn't realise it was a problem in other browsers. I suppose Te Tawharau could use a Mana Māori shading ... only that doesn't exist either. I feel the best solution is another Template:NZparlbox non-party allegiance (or similar), where shading is a HEX value.
Fan |
talk
12:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Years | Term | Electorate | Party | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1853–1946 | Changed allegiance to: | Te Tawharau | |||
1946–1996 | Changed allegiance to: | Independent | |||
1996–2011 | Changed allegiance to: | Piri Wiri Tua |
{{NZ parlbox allegiance minor|color= |start= |end= |party= }}
Works, both for HEX numbers, current party/meta/shading and named colors. Breaks if incorrect or no party name.
Fan |
talk
13:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
This article has recently been created, and it seems odd that it hasn't been created before. So odd, that I wonder if it is a duplicate of an existing article somewhere? Adabow ( talk · contribs) 10:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah... I always thought it was odd that there wasn't a standalone article summarizing the local government system in NZ. (Most other countries in the English-speaking world seem to have such an article - cf Local government in the Republic of Ireland, Local government in Australia and Local government in Scotland, for instance.) Hence why I created it, in the hope that it will expand with time. What I'd really like to see in the article is some detailed sourced information on the history and development of local government in NZ (counties, boroughs and so on) prior to the present-day system. I don't have the expertise to write that myself (not being a New Zealander), but, at a glance, some of the relevant information seems to be scattered around in List of former territorial authorities in New Zealand, Counties of New Zealand and Borough#New_Zealand. Walton One 20:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that we collaborate on the
12 remaining unreferenced
BLPs. My idea is that we collaborate on a given article, get it referenced and expanded so that it qualifies for
DYK, take a breather of a few days and tackle the next one. It's easy to get these to 'Did you Know', as unreferenced bios need to be twice expanded only (and have at least 1500 bytes of prose). Anybody keen to chip in? If we get at least three people together, I'd say we do a team approach. First one that we can collaborate on is Katherine O'Regan, which I'm working on in
my userspace (feel free to edit there), as expansions have to be done over no more than 5 days (so when done, I'll just copy it across and that way it's done in 1 day, however long it takes me).
Schwede
66
19:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I imagine that we're going to see an upswing of activity in relation to the up-coming New Zealand general election, 2011, has there been any particular planning for it?
I'm thinking it would be quite useful to have a checklist of things to do and not to do. Things like ( transcluded list; click the link to get to the source): User:Stuartyeates/Scratchpad
Any other ideas? Stuartyeates ( talk) 09:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
The earlier legislative council doesn't seem to be covered yet. I've started a discussion on the talk page of New Zealand Legislative Council. Schwede 66 18:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Article alerts are working again. See the project page. If you'd like to keep a close watch of these alerts without keeping an eye on the project page itself (bot updates don't result in a watchlist notification of the project page), you can watchlist the notification page itself. Schwede 66 00:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
I deleted the Governors-General from those infoboxes which had them. However, I was wondering, which is prefferd for the 38 articles? - having the Governors-General included or excluded. If the former, I can begin adding/re-adding them. GoodDay ( talk) 00:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I've just archived historic talk page content and the reason that the 2007 discussion above hasn't been archived is that I have some further thoughts on this. As a result of the above, we now have pages for all the governments since 1890, which is great! The following template goes with it:
Obviously, we've had governments prior to 1890, before political parties had come into being. These governments are usually called ministries, based on the premier's name, and sometimes the name of the two leading figures. For example, the first of those ministries was the Bell– Sewell Ministry, and my thoughts are that we should have pages for those governments, too. So, how about we call the first one Bell–Sewell Ministry? I propose that we use a hyphen without spaces between names, and use a capital M for Ministry in this case. What are your thoughts? Schwede 66 03:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok, here's my attempt at this. One of the things that need sorting is that some ministries are not unambiguous, see for example Fox. The other thing that needs discussing is that the list below is derived from King's Penguin History of New Zealand, and the years and ministries might not necessarily align with the entries on the various premier pages (e.g. Atkinson is shown by King with two Ministries for 1876):
Should these simply be added in front of the governments that are already in the template, or do we do something else? It's not directly comparable, as the First Liberal is broken down by King into the various ministries, e.g. Balance (1891-93), Seddon (1893-1906) and so on. Schwede 66 19:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I've been working on the Bell–Sewell Ministry and the link points to my userspace. If you have a look at the draft, you'll see that there's lots of historical context, but I haven't been able to find much substance on the Ministry itself. Please feel free to chip in. The reward is DYK credit (apart from filling a big gap in our political history). Before I'm happy with the quality of the article, I'd like to add a bit more substance to it. If need be, I start going through articles in Papers Past.
I've had some lingering doubts that maybe Ministry shouldn't be capitalised. But that's resolved now, as I've had a look at Ministry (collective executive) and the lists that are linked to that article. Ministry shall have a capital M.
The government template needs to be updated and an incomplete draft is in my userspace. Working on this, I've come to the conclusion that we don't just need to add the responsible governments starting with Bell–Sewell, but we should really (ultimately) also cover Fitzgerald's first executive, and the second one by Forsaith. So, what I've done is to allow for three groups in the template. What I'm struggling with is what to call these groups. Have a look whether you think the labels are appropriate. And the bigger question of course is whether breaking this into three groups is the most sensible way to do it. And whilst you are at it, is Fitzgerald Executive as opposed to Fitzgerald Ministry a suitable way of distinguishing this from the responsible government that started with Bell–Sewell?
That's it from me. I'd appreciate your feedback. And as I say, your additions to draft material in my userspace are most welcome. Schwede 66 02:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
User:Schwede66/Contributions/Template:Governments of New Zealand
See my sandbox for a list of Ministries from Wilson page 59-98. It uses the titles from Wilson eg Fox Ministry, 1856 rather than Fox Ministry or First Fox Ministry, as I wish to finish the list and make into a Wikipedia article before the book is due back at the library. The Ministry title above (eg "Fox Ministry") could be added for the pre-1890 ones that are likely to have an article on them. Wilson goes to the "Lange Ministry, 1984" and presumably it could be continued to the present. Hugo999 ( talk) 23:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Excellent work, Hugo. To make this a bit easier, here's a copy of the beginning of the list from your sandbox, and then the same list with redlinks, so that we know what we are talking about in detail. I don't mind to use this system in lieu of the above. Whatever system we agree on, can I suggest that it resides on this page?
Here's Hugo's list:
Here's my suggestion of particular article names:
The differences are:
Is this generally acceptable? And regarding the comment "pre-1890 ones that are likely to have an article", I envisage that there will eventually be an article for every single one of them. Schwede 66 03:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
What are we going to do about the local body elections this year? It would be good if we get all the (at least mayoral) results onto WP this time. If we do this, will we put them on the New Zealand local elections, 2010 (that seems like it will overload the page, though) and/or individual results on each article (eg Mayor of Auckland) under an "Election results" section like in electorates (see eg Hamilton East (New Zealand electorate)) and/or create a page for each election in each authority (eg Auckland mayoral election, 2010) and have council results there, too. Please share your thoughts and other suggestions, Adabow ( talk) 06:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
We have a list of New Zealand by-elections and I've been adding to it as I work my way through the Canterbury parliamentary history of 19th century. The list is nowhere near complete, but it's getting very long, with 148 entries, most of them redlinks. I wonder whether it needs a bit more structure. Well, in my opinion, it does, the question is how?
We have Category:By-elections in New Zealand results templates, which lists the by-elections by decade. So far, there are only seven of those templates. And for completeness, there is Category:By-elections in New Zealand, which lists all the by-elections that have their own pages (so far, we have 27 pages in that category).
One way to structure this could be to list by-elections by parliamentary term. So there could be a heading First Parliament over the by-elections that happened before we voted for the second parliament and so on. We could then have a template for that parliamentary term. I envisage the template to be used on all the electorate that had a by-election during that term, plus of course on all the by-elections of that term themselves.
A problem with having templates by decade is that some parliamentary terms are across two decades. So if we were to include templates with those electorate pages that have had by-elections, some of them would have two templates.
I appreciate that by-elections are becoming a bit less frequent under MMP, and there weren't any in the 46th and 48th term. So maybe we should have one template for 1996 onwards.
What do others think? Schwede 66 00:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
User:Schwede66/Sandbox/Template:NZ by-elections, 5th Parliament hashad (now
published) an attempt of a template.
Schwede
66
20:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
By trawling through historic electorate and ex-MPs I've found many more by-elections - some listed, some implied (by dates that didn't accord with general elections). So far only covered known early electorates (some election pages do not list electorates) and only up to 1890. While some may have been presumed according to poor data I have identified a possible 144 by-elections so far unrecorded at List of New Zealand by-elections. I'm guessing the 1887 introduction of a £10 candidate's deposit was intended to halt this 19th C. version of waka-jumping. For my list see my NZ elections talk page. Fanx ( talk) 15:47, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
I've moved an article about the 3rd New Zealand Parliament into mainspace. It's by no means complete and can do with further input. I'll put some thoughts onto the talk page. Schwede 66 23:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
while assessing articles I've noticed a trend in politics articles to have well-developed prose articles (otherwise easily C and often B class) with absolutely no references. Going back and fixing these should be a priority. For examples, see some of the high-importance start-class articles. dramatic ( talk) 13:31, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Election pages use colours for parties. Is there an overview page somewhere with links to all the relevant templates? Schwede 66 00:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
This page has a whole bunch of them for different shades. -- Andrensath ( talk | contribs) 05:50, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
I've started shifting general election results into a template, and then referencing the info back into the article. I've done this for two reasons:
If you want to have a look, here are the relevant links for the 1st Parliament as an example:
I'm starting the work on the 4th Parliament now, putting the election results together first. Schwede 66 04:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I've only just realised that we have two project pages, with this one using Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand/politics, and the second one using the same name, but a capital P for Politics. I'll shift the content of that page across to this one, and will redirect it. Some good work has been done there about organising photos. Schwede 66 19:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I've recently joined this project. I have noticed that the leads for articles about New Zealand general elections are written in a lot of different ways. I think they should all be consistent. I have started changing them accordingly, modelling them after that for the 1993 election, but my changes at one article (for the 2005 election) were reverted. I think agreement needs to be reached on how to rewrite these articles. Linbit ( talk) 07:22, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Just drawing your attention to the proposal of having Māori seats moved – comment if you wish. Schwede 66 23:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
In the article on by-elections, it gives the following definition: "By-elections in New Zealand occur to fill vacant seats in the New Zealand Parliament. The death, resignation, or expulsion of a sitting electorate MP can cause a by-election." No trouble with that.
We do, however, have other cases and I'm not sure whether they are by-elections, some kind of special election, or a kind of general election that happens at a different time to the main election. And if it's not a by-election, then it shouldn't be listed on that particular page, but would need its own article. Those cases are when new electorates get created during the term of a parliament. So far, I've come across the following instances:
There might have been something else like this going on during the 4th Parliament, as the number of representatives increased from 70 to 76, and only 4 of those were made up by the new Māori electorates.
So, are those elections for new electorates by-elections? If not, what are they? Schwede 66 01:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, Hugo. Schwede 66 04:36, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I came here after a note on my talk page from Schwede66, possibly cos I do a lot of work on UK MPs and elections, and have done a lot of similar work on Irish politics. So here's my thoughts FWIW:
Hope this helps! -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Editor Schwyz, who appears to be doing a lot of category work on provinces all around the world, has moved New Ulster, New Munster and New Leinster to new article names, adding 'Province'. His rationale was to have them "like others in Category:Provinces of New Zealand. He's also changed the template that goes with this.
I've left a note on his talk page:
First of all, thanks for not just moving the articles, but to then also tidy up the respective template. But it would have been much more appropriate if you had dropped a note on the talk page of one of the articles, or gone to the NZ politics taskforce (as per the banners on the talk pages) with this proposal first. The difference between these first three Provinces, and the later 10 Provinces, is that the names of the later Provinces are still in use these days, so the articles do need that disambiguation, whereas the first three names are not in use at all. So if you had asked, we would probably have come to the conclusion of not moving the articles.
So what do you think? My feeling is to revert those changes. Schwede 66 00:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a move proposal for Ted Howard affecting this project and it hasn't as yet created much interest. I invite you to have a look at this. Schwede 66 04:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Editor Good Olfactory is currently doing a lot of good work on categories. I wonder, though, whether we can have a discussion on this here before new aspects get started, to avoid having to rename categories, and to ensure that his thoughts align with those of members of this group. I for one am not sure whether we should have categories 'New Zealand MPs by xyz city' (as they have been created) or 'New Zealand MPs by xyz region'. And if the latter, should we be using the current regions, or the historic regions? Up to (at least) 1876, all the political reporting was based on the provinces, but that of course changed at some point. If we go for current regions, than we might end up with a 'strange home' for some historic politicians, i.e. regions that never existed when they were around.
I have invited Good Olfactory to comment here. One of the categories that is a bit of a mess is mayors and I'd be glad if we could tidy that up, too. Schwede 66 22:06, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi team, over the last few months, I've been working my way through the early political history. We've had articles for each electorate since earlier this year (thanks to Hugo999), and I've added the 3rd to 10th Parliament (the latter ones are just stubs). Up to 1890, election articles have infoboxes for easier navigation. And whilst I'm working my way through the election results (I'm currently working on the 1871 template), I'm tidying up the electorate articles. By way of example, they go from rather incomplete to something that covers the whole period including a nice table. Dunedin took forever to sort out; they went crazy down there when the Central Otago Gold Rush hit and were creating new electorates left, right and centre, transferring MPs from one electorate to another without by-elections, and it's all reasonably poorly documented in the standard textbooks. To go from this to what it looks these days took many, many hours. And in the process of sorting out electorates, I've been working with Hugo999 to get stubs set up for the missing 19th century MPs.
So whilst there are a good number of electorate articles that have yet to be prettied up, I think we've got at least lists of all the MPs compiled with each article. At this point, I'm not aware of any missing MPs or redlinks. If you spot any gaps, let us know, but chances are that we have at least stubs for each NZ MP! I think the list is complete. That's reason to pause and feel good about ourselves. And please note that Hugo999 would have set up something like 90% of the stubs during 2010, so please give credit where it's due. Schwede 66 05:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
There's a discussion at Template talk:Historic electorates of New Zealand about what to include and what not include with the template. Can you please join in? Schwede 66 18:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Created page New Zealand supplementary elections and edited electorate pages that referenced these as by-elections. Fanx ( talk) 11:28, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
I created Suburbs of Auckland (New Zealand electorate) as a separate page rather than a REDIRECT to Auckland Suburbs (New Zealand electorate). These were quite clearly two different electorates, separated by time (1853–60) & (1928–46) respectively, and also by location — in the first instance (Suburbs of Auckland) was what is now the inner city suburbs (roughly Ponsonby to Parnell via Mt Eden), while Auckland Suburbs was to the West (roughly the current Te Atatū, Waitakere and parts of New Lynn electorates). Fanx ( talk) 22:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Can anyone work out where the NZ Parlboxes of Ann Batten, Tuariki Delamere, Jack Elder, Tau Henare, Tuku Morgan and Rana Waitai are getting there awful shading backgrounds from? As far as I know they should come from Template:Mauri_Pacific/meta/shading and Template:Te_Tawharau/meta/shading, neither of which exist. Te Tawharau doesn't even have a Template:Te_Tawharau/meta/color. What have I missed? Mattlore ( talk) 20:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I suggest that we:
I was getting a white bgcolor thanks to Firefox, so I didn't realise it was a problem in other browsers. I suppose Te Tawharau could use a Mana Māori shading ... only that doesn't exist either. I feel the best solution is another Template:NZparlbox non-party allegiance (or similar), where shading is a HEX value.
Fan |
talk
12:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Years | Term | Electorate | Party | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1853–1946 | Changed allegiance to: | Te Tawharau | |||
1946–1996 | Changed allegiance to: | Independent | |||
1996–2011 | Changed allegiance to: | Piri Wiri Tua |
{{NZ parlbox allegiance minor|color= |start= |end= |party= }}
Works, both for HEX numbers, current party/meta/shading and named colors. Breaks if incorrect or no party name.
Fan |
talk
13:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
This article has recently been created, and it seems odd that it hasn't been created before. So odd, that I wonder if it is a duplicate of an existing article somewhere? Adabow ( talk · contribs) 10:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah... I always thought it was odd that there wasn't a standalone article summarizing the local government system in NZ. (Most other countries in the English-speaking world seem to have such an article - cf Local government in the Republic of Ireland, Local government in Australia and Local government in Scotland, for instance.) Hence why I created it, in the hope that it will expand with time. What I'd really like to see in the article is some detailed sourced information on the history and development of local government in NZ (counties, boroughs and so on) prior to the present-day system. I don't have the expertise to write that myself (not being a New Zealander), but, at a glance, some of the relevant information seems to be scattered around in List of former territorial authorities in New Zealand, Counties of New Zealand and Borough#New_Zealand. Walton One 20:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that we collaborate on the
12 remaining unreferenced
BLPs. My idea is that we collaborate on a given article, get it referenced and expanded so that it qualifies for
DYK, take a breather of a few days and tackle the next one. It's easy to get these to 'Did you Know', as unreferenced bios need to be twice expanded only (and have at least 1500 bytes of prose). Anybody keen to chip in? If we get at least three people together, I'd say we do a team approach. First one that we can collaborate on is Katherine O'Regan, which I'm working on in
my userspace (feel free to edit there), as expansions have to be done over no more than 5 days (so when done, I'll just copy it across and that way it's done in 1 day, however long it takes me).
Schwede
66
19:36, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I imagine that we're going to see an upswing of activity in relation to the up-coming New Zealand general election, 2011, has there been any particular planning for it?
I'm thinking it would be quite useful to have a checklist of things to do and not to do. Things like ( transcluded list; click the link to get to the source): User:Stuartyeates/Scratchpad
Any other ideas? Stuartyeates ( talk) 09:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
The earlier legislative council doesn't seem to be covered yet. I've started a discussion on the talk page of New Zealand Legislative Council. Schwede 66 18:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Article alerts are working again. See the project page. If you'd like to keep a close watch of these alerts without keeping an eye on the project page itself (bot updates don't result in a watchlist notification of the project page), you can watchlist the notification page itself. Schwede 66 00:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
I deleted the Governors-General from those infoboxes which had them. However, I was wondering, which is prefferd for the 38 articles? - having the Governors-General included or excluded. If the former, I can begin adding/re-adding them. GoodDay ( talk) 00:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)