Jump to content

Talk:Colin Craig

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

Untitled

[edit]

Some suggestions for improvements for interested editors, should the article be noteworthy.

A good goal would be to make it look more like this: Metiria Turei (an example of a NZ political party (co)leader's page) to look more like a biographical wikipedia article. As it stands it's a loose collection of facts.

Some possible subheadings:

Early Years (if there is anything verifiable to include) - past and current business interests - personal life (if verifiably documented and noteworthy)

Mayoralty Campaign 2010 campaigning, results

Conservative Party of New Zealand foundation, leadership, Rodney electorate

Also, a date of birth would be good; and other general biographic data.

Similar data (but compressed to one or two paragraphs) might be appropriate in a section on the Conservative Party of New Zealand page (which is also rather short). Ridcully Jack (talk) 09:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
do not merge. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think we ought to move the Conservative Party of New Zealand material here--the party itself only has a few hundred members and coverage of it seems at this point to center around Craig as the founder. I see no coverage of the party independent of the party, so I do not think the general notability of the party itself can be established at this point. --Nuujinn (talk) 09:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

oppose - the article cites multiple independent sources (including the NZ Herald and the Electoral Commission, who are the authority on this) for the party's existence. The fact that a party is small or seems insignificant or odd to foreign eyes does not mean it is not notable. The notability criteria for NZ political parties is if they are registered, run candidates, or are notable for some other reason. While this party is not yet registered, it has applied, and in the normal course of things registration will be granted in the next few weeks. It is also very clearly intending to run candidates in the upcoming election, which is less than two months away (and nomination day is one month away, so we will know then whether to cull or not). In other words, it is going to meet notability criteria in a very short space of time, which means we'll just have to undo any merger to create an independent article. --IdiotSavant (talk) 10:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The notability criteria for NZ political parties is if they are registered, run candidates, or are notable for some other reason. Can you point me to the policy that says that? Is there any coverage of the party that is not linked to Craig? I just don't see any significant coverage of the party itself. --Nuujinn (talk) 10:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Long-established practice in List of political parties in New Zealand. I summarised that practice two years ago here, and no-one objected to it. I can't think of a single registered party which is simply treated as a subset of its leader, even though some are highly personalist.--IdiotSavant (talk) 11:22, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Talk page discussions cannot supercede GNG. --Nuujinn (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. That policy gives us a general guideline for what we consider notable in the context of NZ's political system. Which is the context that matters.--IdiotSavant (talk) 03:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
oppose The party is not insignificant; the party has at least 500 members, and membership is not an estimate of actual support. Although this is not something to cite in an article, the iPredict futures market puts the Conservative Party at getting 0.88% of the vote, which is enough that if Craig won Rodney, he would not be in overhang, but not enough to bring a list MP (would need around 1.2%). The Conservative Party page does need improving, but most of the references are related to Craig in the same was that most 'recent' information about the Progressives is related to Anderton, and most recent information about United Future is related to Dunne. It is unsurprising that the party leader is in the news more often than others in the party. Ridcully Jack (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, well sort of. The political party deserves its own page and is cleary notable. I wouldn't however be opposed to merging Colin Craig into the party article? Mattlore (talk) 01:02, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And that I think is the real problem here. Colin Craig isn't notable, and doesn't look likely to become so. But we're stuck with him. Rather than trying to eat an article which should be independent simply to provide padding, I'd suggest either appealing that keep decision, or just accepting it and moving on.--IdiotSavant (talk) 03:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the keep decision is currently under review: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 September 28. Mattlore (talk) 04:17, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose According to the Conservative Party of New Zealand they have more members than most minor parties. From http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/news.php

Conservatives Overtake Minor Parties 13 September 2011

Colin Craig, leader of the Conservative Party has announced they’ve signed up more members than the majority of established minor parties in just four weeks.

The number of paid up Conservative Party members today passed 1050.

“I understand ACT only have around 800 members after being around for 17 years, and United Future have struggled ever since 2004 to keep 500” says Craig. “To have our numbers this high so quickly is an outstanding achievement, and shows that kiwis not only want change but are prepared to stand up and do something about it." ...

Today’s announcement comes amidst a struggle for party memberships. National admit their numbers are low, and are appealing for more. NZ First were only able to muster 300 to their annual conference, while United Future barely managed 60, and featured the leader of another party as their key speaker. Roalexx (talk) 01:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GNG is the base criteria for notability, I think numbers of members is truly irrelevant. If Craig is not notable, then the party isn't either, since every source centers around Craig and is based on announcements by him. Are there any actual or potential candidates for election from this party other than Craig? Any other member who is interviewed or quoted in the press? --Nuujinn (talk) 00:26, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When memberships exceed those of parties with seats, then it is. With National's selection in Rodney being marred by accusations of vote-rigging, and Labour selecting the second-place Rodney Ward candidate in Auckland Local Elections 2010, it was already a interesting race. Add in Colin Craig, whose father was on the former Rodney Council (which was larger than the electorate) and there is a three-horse race. Colin Craig would be notable simply for coming third in the Auckland Super City mayoralty after the left and right candidates. Roalexx (talk) 01:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Colin Craig would be notable simply for coming third in the Auckland Super City mayoralty after the left and right candidates WP:POLITICIAN begs to differ. --IdiotSavant (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
With respect Nuujinn, IdiotSavant and myself both blog on Politics in New Zealand. I don't know if you do, but considering on your talk page it says you speak Southern (American) I doubt it. If you wanted to get rid of party pages on Wikipedia I can think of many that will receive less votes than the Conservatives have members. Roalexx (talk) 01:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any actual or potential candidates for election from this party other than Craig? We'll know definitively in a month at the worst (Nomination Day is 1 November). But as someone who actually pays attention to political parties in New Zealand, I think it highly likely. This isn't one man and his local cause (e.g. No Commercial Airport at Whenuapai Airbase Party), or a grumpy old guy (e.g. Ordinary Kiwis Party); its shaping up to be the latest vehicle for Christian politics in New Zealand, a minor but very definite strand of our political landscape. Craig is getting the media coverage ATM because he's founded it, because the NZ media favours presidential-style coverage focusing on party leaders, and because there's not much else to report on yet. That will change over the next two months as the party is registered and the election campaign kicks off. --IdiotSavant (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As we still have the Rugby World Cup which dominates everything, even double-dip credit rating falls. Members are going up rapidly. I asked someone in the know today and members are at 1500. I'm sure candidates will be released soon. IS, haven't read that one yet. So many rules, I just use common sense. Roalexx (talk) 00:57, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
WP:POLITICIAN "3.Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article"" Such as the New Zealand Herald, Stuff.co.nz, Scoop.co.nz, TV 3 News etcetera, etcetera. Roalexx (talk) 01:12, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
New Citizens Party Exit Election Race PRESS RELEASE 18 October 2011
The New Citizens Party executive board have confirmed the Party is withdrawing from the 2011 Election campaign.
Mr Paul Young, the New Citizens candidate who came a credible third behind National and Labour in the Botany by-election earlier this year, will now be running as a candidate for the Conservative Party instead.
The first of a fair few I would imagine. Roalexx (talk) 12:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree When the party gets more important it can have it's own article. Vought109 (talk) 22:54, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Both are now notable topics in their own right. (Unfortunately said the staunchly liberal Alan Liefting...) -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Weird word in lede

[edit]

What is 'anti-smacking legislation'?108.180.251.198 (talk) 06:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Anti-smacking" refers to corporal punishment – so e.g. "smacking" a child on the bottom for being naughty/misbehaving. See New Zealand citizens-initiated referendum, 2009. — Cheers Ballofstring (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also see Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007, which I've added a link to in the article.-gadfium 08:35, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Colin Craig. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive detail

[edit]

This article contains excessive detail on various lawsuits, much of it added by people who have a conflict of interest. I suggest we trim back the detail to about a sentence per lawsuit explaining who sued who, what the subject was in a few words, and the result, with one or at most two references. Does any uninvolved party wish to tackle this?-gadfium 02:45, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Colin_Craig&oldid=1206817385"