Talk:2011 Te Tai Tokerau by-election

Hone as an Independent?

I am not sure why Harawira is listed as an Independent. He is a member of the Mana Party and can have that listed on the ballot regardless of if it has 500 members and is registered. Registering is only required for Party votes - that's why people can stand for parties like "Restoration of Christ Party" at general elections. From the election.org.nz by-election page; "Candidates are required to indicate on the nomination form whether they are representing a party or are an Independent. Candidates claiming to represent a party should be prepared to provide the Returning Officer, if required, with evidence (such as a party constitution) that the party he or she claims to represent exists and evidence of eligibility to represent that party (such as a letter from the party secretary)."[1] Therefore I don't see why he cannot be listed as representing the Mana Party? Mattlore (talk) 23:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Hone is listed as an independent candidate because he is at present not registered as running for the Mana Party. The question of whether he can represent that party in parliament despite it not being on the Electoral Commission register also means he should be listed as an independent until the official candidates list comes out. Hone Harawira as he has only just resigned effective today he cannot yet have put forward his name as a candidate as the writs for the process of by election have not yet been issued or dated. Essentially this page itself has pre-empted the by election announcement. most likely in the next 2-4 weeks the Electoral Commission will issue that list but until that point he has to be viewed as an Independant. Kaiserm (talk) 01:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I suspect that Kaiserm's assessment of the situation is correct. Schwede66 01:32, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps he should be removed from the infobox then, listing him and the Mana Party seperately seems to be rather silly. And of course he can represent a party in partliament if he is elected representing that party - registering with the electorate commission is only required to gain party votes. Mattlore (talk) 01:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed shall we remove any candidates until the names has been officially announced or otherwise? Kaiserm (talk) 01:50, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I Agree. that seems to be the safest option. Mattlore (talk) 01:56, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Done Kaiserm (talk) 02:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Isn't this all a little bit premature as Harawira hasn't actually resigned yet? All he has done is say he's going to resign - at close of business today (2 May) there has been no notice in the media or from Harawira or Elections NZ that he has resigned his seat, and given that politics is fast filling in the hole he made (Māori Party saying truce is off and public backlash at the by-election expense) it is (remotely) possible that it may not even happen. A by-election article should only be included in the main en.wikipedia once it has been announced by The Speaker or by elections.org.nz - for the moment this article is best left in a sandbox. FanN | talk 07:43, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes someone made the article about a week earlier than it really should have been but regardless it is up now and should be kept up since Harawira plan was to resigned effective today or at least this week triggering the by-election of course dates and candidates are all things to come. I think the article is fine as is for the moment but if there is no announcement of a official resignation in the next couple of days then re-assessment of content may be required. If there is no announcement after 28th of May I'd consider looking at closing the page though I doubt he has been bluffing. I believe the page has been kept very NPOV as it is despite media politics but let's see how the next couple of days go before any re-assessments of it as it may be he entered a resignation this evening and the speaker will post it as of business tomorrow or Harawira plain forgot again. As the above talk has commented we have generally agreed to keep candidates and possible candidates off the page until we have clearer views on that ie official notices of candidacy. Kaiserm (talk) 07:57, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth - Wikipedia:Verifiability.
I've edited article to highlight its conditional nature, but as the article is speculation about a by-election that has not been called I'm still not happy that it is here. Just because George W. Bush and Barak Obama had called for the death of Osama bin Laden doesn't mean the article had any place on wikipedia until today, and as there was such a page it was appropriate that for the last 4½ years it was a REDIRECT - just as this article should be.FanN | talk 08:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I think your edits are acceptable and I know the sentiment as I stated above if something doesn't officially come out by the 28th this page should be deleted and I think your edits are valid to keep this page until then at which point if nothing has happened it may be worth a deletion request/discussion . Kaiserm (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Interesting discussion. I note that Harawira is shown as a member of Mana on both his article and the 49th New Zealand Parliament article. Should that be reverted, too? Schwede66 03:36, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes I've just been undertaking that also due to the fact he cannot be a Mana Party MP, regardless of candidacy, until after a By election or general election- parliament still references him as an Independent and wikipedia edits should follow that source and election NZ over others Kaiserm (talk) 04:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Comparisons to Tauranga

The section about similarities between this election and the Tauranga one is complete original research. There needs to have been a reliable source comparing the two elections and drawing these conclusions. Just writing about the circumstances in each election does not allow us to compare the two events. Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Apologies, I will add some extra corresponding citations on that issue in comparison to Harawira but I feel it is valid regarding and in context to the nature of this by election.

Kaiserm (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

These are unreliable sources. See WP:IRS for more info on this. Blogs and many self-published sources are unreliable. Claire Trevett is reliable because she is writing for a credible newspaper. Adabow (talk · contribs) 09:47, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

As per above discussion, what are the views on the re-edited Tauranga section; The problem I see with deleting it in entirety is that the view of Public Address has been around and utilized in the media in the past and if the Tauranga section is unreliable based on opinion based evidence that would imply in my view that the Herald view by Claire Trevett is also only opinion as it is not backed by further evidence in my POV though I'd take to be whether blog opinion and news opinion are equally valid for a section based on opinion, though that is for wiki users to judge here. Kaiserm (talk) 09:52, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Blog and self-published sources are allowable provided they comply as an expert opinion per the rule in Self-published sources. I would contend that Public Address is sourced and edited by an expert in this field, Graeme Edgeler based on his experience in electoral law as a specialist in the legal field on that matter and media use of his blog's view, I believe I can provide corresponding evidence of credible use of his opinion in other situations from those media groups however I would also contend Oliver Wood does not fall under that perimeter and can be removed as a source along with that attached corresponding text. Kaiserm (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

MP before election

Listing the 'MP before election' as vacant is not helpful in my opinion and also goes against current practice. This space is there to list the MP who held the seat before the by election was needed - of course there is going to be a period of vacancy, otherwise there wouldn't be a by-election! That doesn't need to be said. Have a look at the last two we have had in Mana and Botany. They list Winnie Laban and Pansy Wong respectively and not vacant. In the same way this should list Harawira as he was the MP when the by-election was announced. Mattlore (talk) 03:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Whilst technically, the position is now vacant, I've got to agree with Mattlore on this. Schwede66 04:11, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

If this is the argument for keeping him listed in the second spot then surely the "incumbent" moniker should be removed as he is no longer that and the seat is legally vacant. it is fine to list the previous MP but if he is not recognised as the MP in Law then clearly wikipedia should not list him as such Kaiserm (talk) 04:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I've managed to change it to "MP before election" instead of "Incumbent" by playing with the infobox, I think that is the best we can do at the moment. Mattlore (talk) 04:20, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

As an aside I would argue that he is the incumbent, as he is the person that won the seat at the last election. :-) Mattlore (talk) 04:23, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll accept the changed arrangement as it is a fair compromise in light of the two views Kaiserm (talk) 04:25, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Hone Harawira - cropped.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Hone Harawira - cropped.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)