Talk:Electoral districts of New South Wales

Australia: New South Wales / Politics Low‑importance

	Australia portal Electoral districts of New South Wales 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New South Wales (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of New South Wales.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Untitled

Source: Parliamentary Record (Volume VII)

This is the list of current electoral districts. There was a list of all electoral districts past and present, accessible here.

I've cut down on the list because the full list of 300+ districts is really too much work at this time.

The tables are currently, missing the "Party affiliation" columns, and the "Period" data contains exact dates. Existing electoral district pages only use the year. Maybe I need to use some regular expressions to strip out the day and months to conform with this. -- Newhoggy | Talk 08:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A full list of past members can be found here. It's not exactly sorted but it does the job. If there is no party affiliation given (especially for pre-1900 members) I've been assuming independent. Would it be wise to turn these tables into templates? Some of the articles that I've been through (see my talk page) have tables that are more complete than these. Alph a x ^τεχ 02:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Table of Political parties

The Parliamentary report uses ambiguous abbrevations that can easily lead to confusion. For instance, it is not clear whether Lib. means Liberal Party of Australia or Commonwealth Liberal Party, and whether Nat. means Nationalist Party of Australia or National Party of Australia. To help avoid confusion, a table here can be used to determine what the abbreviations in the Parliamentary report means based on the date.

Abbreviation	Time	Party	Became
A.L.P.	1908-now	Australian Labor Party
C.P.	?-1975	Country Party	National Country Party
Freetrade.	1880-1909	Free Trade Party
Lib.	1909-1916	Commonwealth Liberal Party	Nationalist Party of Australia
Lib.	1945-now	Liberal Party of Australia
Lib. Ref.	?-?	Liberal Reform Party
Nat.	1917-1931	Nationalist Party of Australia	United Australia Party
Nat.	1975-1982	National Country Party
Nat.	1982-now	National Party of Australia
N.P.	1981-now	National Party of Australia
Prog.	?-?	Progressive Party
Prot.	1880-1909	Protectionist Party
UAP	1931-1945	United Australia Party	Liberal Party of Australia

For parties not on this table, please consult list of political parties in Australia and update this table accordingly.

Again...

...why is this here? All of this information should be in the respective district articles. Ambi 02:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ambi, after your comments last time I thought I needed to get accurate information, but I haven't been able to find information that has Member, Party affiliation, and Period all in a single table. I put it all here so I can fill in the missing bits from different sources before they go to their proper place. Currently, "Party Affiliation" is still missing. I thought being a Talk page rather than an article page it would be less of a problem. Is there a better way to do this?

-- Newhoggy | Talk 07:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid there's no easy way to find out party affiliations. The only way to find it is to individually check the former members section of the NSW parliament website (which has party information for every former member). Ambi 07:51, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's also all in one place because it is much easier to automate the process of touching up text when it is all in one page. For instance I automated the table formatting, and if its decided I should drop the day/month part of the dates to conform with existing pages, I can automate that too.

-- Newhoggy | Talk 08:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, makes sense. :) Ambi 07:51, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have two requests here:

Can this go into some sort of template/subpage form? I know that templates shouldn't be used for article content, but it's really, really, REALLY annoying to find that the stuff here is different from the articles. For example, we could put them at New South Wales Legislative Assembly electoral districts/(electorate); then, to insert them into the article, you'd use {{subst:New South Wales Legislative Assembly electoral districts/(electorate)}} - there'd need to be a comment than any updates should happen on the "template" page, and to update it in the article you should delete and re-subst: it in.
Can people please not use abbreviations for party names? Stuff like "prot. prog." is bloody confusing.

Thanks, Alphax ^τεχ 13:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the "prot. prog" and "lib. ref.". It can't be helped. This is exactly what the parliamentary record says - and it can be ambiguous - for instance, does Lib. stand for Commonwealth Liberal Party or Liberal Party of Australia? When I put it here, it means, that some further investigation needs to be done about what the political party is before it goes into the respective electoral district pages.

No easy way out unfortunately.

This is the reason I am trying to build this table to determine what the best party to go with the abbreviation is.

-- Newhoggy | Talk 12:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming errors

I've seen quite a few instances of "The (surname)" turn up - mostly due to the Parliamentary handbook having names in (last), (titles) (first) format - so stuff like "Smith, The Right Honourable John" turns into "The Smith". Now, case in point, what's the prefferred name for "Fitzpatrick, The Hon. John Charles Lucas", member for Bathurst from 1920 to 1927? Alphax ^τεχ 13:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd ask Google, and then ask Factiva. If that fails, you may want to try a book - the Biographical Dictionary of the NSW Parliament, perhaps. Ambi 04:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unfortunately, I used an automated tool to extract the name without taking this "The" thing into account. For the example you chose, if you could change that to [[John Fitzpatrick]] that would be great. If the name is already used for a nother person, then [[John Fitzpatrick (Australian politician)|John Fitzpatrick]] would be more appropriate. This convention is based on existing articles that existed before I started this work and was suggested to me by User:Ambi.

-- Newhoggy | Talk 00:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the example in Division of Bennelong and noticed that the titles Hon. and Sir. are kept but are separate from the name of the page, for instance "Sir [[John Cramer]]". This is probably the best way to do it. The question is whether or not we want to do this now or wait until all the articles are up to the same standard before adding the titles.

-- Newhoggy | Talk 00:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to split each of these sections and put them into the relevant articles. Those tabls that aren't complete will go winto the relevant discussion pages instead. This will allow the "What links here" to work properly so that I can extract more relational information and populate the NSW MP pages.

-- Newhoggy | Talk 06:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

district at election vs district at redistribution

There was a redistribution in 2004. This article should make it clear that these are the districts as of the previous election, and that a redistribution occurred which means some of these districts will not be contested at the next election etc.--Ga rr ie 04:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Electoral districts of New South Wales. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100625080533/http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/resources/nswelectionsanalysis/homepage.htm to http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/resources/nswelectionsanalysis/homepage.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 03:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]