Jump to content

Talk:2025 Australian federal election

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Question

[edit]

Shouldn't every party with seats be in the infobox (i.e Labor, the Coalition, the Greens, the KAP, the Centre Alliance and DLFCN, in that order)? I'm referring to here and here. Every other federal election article includes the parties that won seats, why shouldn't this and the 2022 one? Furthermore, state election articles include every party with seats (e.g the one with the most being the 2020 Queensland state election article which includes six parties in the infobox, all of which had at least one seat before the election, in this order: Labor, the LNP, the KAP, the Greens, One Nation and North Queensland First, note that the latter party's MP (Jason Costigan) defected from the LNP and created NQF but lost his seat of Whitsunday to the LNP). Furthermore, articles about upper house elections in Australia (i.e Senate elections and state upper house elections) include every party with seats. It really doesn't hurt to include more parties in the infobox. Any thoughts? Thiscouldbeauser (talk) 13:35, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was a discussion on the 2022 Australian federal election about this.
I would agree with you that for the purpose of the page being clear to the readers we ought to show every party elected.
The only argument I think are reasonable are "Too long of an infobox", which I don't think is emulated on other pages such as the 2020 Irish general election. Noting that it's not emulated on pages such as Next United Kingdom general election. DirectorDirectorDirector (talk) 14:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change the Name?

[edit]

As we get closer to the election might it be prudent to move it to '2025 Australian federal election' to make it more concise? DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 11:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How close is close? It's only April 2024 now. An election could be called for any time between about June 2024 and September 2025. That's 8 months left of 2024 vs. 9 months of 2025. Fairly line-ball, really. But that's not even the point. Within certain legal/constitutional parameters, we simply do not know when the election will called, so to assume at this very early juncture that it will be in 2025 would be folly, imo. Also, how is changing "Next" to "2025" an exercise in concision? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 04:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once it hits 26 November, then it would be fair to change it imo. Need 33 days for a campaign and it has to be on a Saturday, 33 days from the 26th is the last Sunday in 2024. Basetornado (talk) 06:16, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not that it was ever going to occur between Christmas and New Years Day, but to have been held on the last Saturday of the year, 28 December, to allow for the minimum 33 day campaign, the election would have had to have been called on 24 November. As this window has now closed, the election will definitely be held in 2025. Iciebath (talk) 23:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to determine whether Candidates of the next Australian federal election should be an article. Onetwothreeip (talk) 01:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The candidates article has been deleted. Does anyone have an issue with listing candidates for election in this article? Onetwothreeip (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The result of the AfD was that the content was not ready for the mainspace. Having it on the main election article would be even worse than having it in its own separate article. J2m5 (talk) 02:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, it's reliably sourced content and belongs on Wikipedia in some form. Let's see what anyone else thinks. Onetwothreeip (talk) 10:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree it should be own wikipedia in some form. I am in favour of having it on this article at the moment considering thst quite some more candidates have been anounced yet not enough to warrant its own article. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 11:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]