Talk:2007 New South Wales state election campaign

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

Editorial Material[edit]

Under the Labor Campaign section, the large chunks of quotations from editorials do not add any extra material, just opinions and commentary on the preceding facts provided. I will delete this section soon: The Herald described the payment as a "bribe" and a "political rort". According to a Herald editorial, "The use of public funds to compensate Connector Motorways for delays to road changes around the tunnel is ... as cynical a piece of political jobbery as Sydney has seen in many a long year." Recurring dreams 09:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider any such editing to be heavily POV. The reaction to the work of politicians is crucial to providing readers with an understanding of what has happened. If the reaction is negative, so be it. Joestella 04:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Media reaction to political announcements is important, but a problem arises when the comments selected for inclusion in an article are all one-sided. Newspaper coverage tends to be negative to political announcements, with good news relegated to the in-brief column. So - any article covering an election campaign is more likely to include criticisms than praise. That said, the "selection" of issues and newspaper references for this article betrays an apparent bias towards one side of politics.
Anyone can trawl through the papers and cut and paste items supporting their political views. This article should be better than that - it should outline the major election themes, each party's response, and the platform they are presenting for voters. Instead its just a summary of anti-Iemma newspaper clips.
What's needed is a) a rework to remove some of the more spurious sections (eg. is the ALP slogan such a vote-changer that we need several lines of sniggering about it?) and b)a greater and more even-handed focus on the actual issues of the campaign, and the month-by-month events that relate to them.
In the last week, we have seen Debnam focus heavily on youth crime (doli incapax and PCYC's), and Iemma promise extra spending on health (nurses and GP clinics). These are major issues which can be presented in a balanced manner. Things like this should be the bulk of this article, not slabs of anti-Iemma editorial on insider issues and irrelevancies. Jeendan 06:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An anonymous editor has just added the Cherie Burton staffer embezzlement issue to the December 2006 section of this page. I am interested in anyone's views of whether this is an election issue deserving of a mention. If I was a cynic, I would note that no one has rushed to add Chris Hartcher's staffer Ray Carter's embezzlement of Meals on Wheels funds, for which he was charged last month. For good reason, as I doubt that anyone outside Hartcher's electorate cares.

In the words of a famous former MP, can someone 'please explain' why Burton's staffer's actions are so much more worthy of inclusion in this piece? Jeendan 03:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article just gets worse and worse[edit]

This article just gets more and more POV. Any anti-Labor comment is included, no matter how trivial or poorly based in fact, to the exclusion of any genuine coverage of election issues. I don't see the point of it myself (its an online encyclopedia - do you think you're winning votes here?). On occasion I have attempted some minor changes to bring a bit of balance but in hindsight that is just adding legimitacy to what is essentially an anti-Labor attack page. So - I've removed my edits and won't make any more. Joe - its all yours and good luck with it :)Jeendan 03:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See you for the federal campaign article, Jeendan. Maybe by then you'll be able to assume good faith. Joestella 07:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No thanks. If the intention is to make that into a page similar to this one, I'll give it a miss. Good luck with it. Jeendan 10:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree this article reads like Liberal Party propaganda (no mention of Denham's appalling plans to send 10 year old children to jail for instance), but it would be better to watch and revert the worst aspects of POV.--Grahamec 07:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance[edit]

In the following statement, I do not see the relevance of the first phrase about Steven Chaytor:

On the same day that Labor MP Stephen Chaytor was convicted of assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Debnam told the premier "Mr Iemma, make sure your union thugs stay away from my wife and from my team."

Also need citations for that paragraph in general. Recurring dreams 09:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Debnam's statement might have some relevance, given it is an extremely serious allegation (that the Premier orchestrated physical violence against women).
However the attempt to link this with Chaytor's arrest is just a political smear (along the lines of - Chaytor is Labor, Iemma is Labor, Chaytor hit a woman so Iemma must support violence against women).
I have removed it from the article. If anyone can think of a good reason for making this association with Chaytor's arrest, please post it here for discussion. Jeendan 04:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Campaign Trail[edit]

I added a section to 2006 regarding embezzlment that occured at Cherie Burton's office. I think it is of state significance and thus belongs in this article as:

  • A government Minister (not just a local member) was involved
  • The speaker of the NSW Legislative Assembly was dressed dressed down by the Premier for his inaction
  • Iemma ordered the premier's department chief Col Gellatly to investigate why nothing was done until the matter was uncovered by the press
  • The clerk of the Legislative Assembly was ordered to alert ICAC and the police

The opposition called for the sacking John Aquilina and Cherie Burton over the affair (or at least asked Iemma why he continues to have Aquilina as the speaker and Burton as an MP) 203.6.205.22 01:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think some of the above are that notable, to be hoenst (Iemma didn't publicly dress down Aquilina, and the Opposition call for everyone's sacking every day). But I'm happy to let it stay as you've written it, especially given my views about the nature of this entire page. Thanks for explaining your reasoning. Jeendan 03:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marina development[edit]

I took a sentence out regarding this, as it wasn't accurate but I can't think of a way to improve it without making this ten times longer.

Carr's moratorium on new commercial marinas was lifted in September 2005 with the gazettal of the Sydney Harbour REP. What this current story is about is proposed changes to the rules for issuing land owner's consent to allow the lodging of DA's (not the determination of the DA's themselves). The changes haven't been approved (only publicly exhibited) and the planning powers are not handed to Tripodi because as Waterways Minister he already is the consent authority (as was every previous Waterways Minister since at least 1979 when the Environmental Planning and Assssment Act was introduced). Jeendan 19:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Police Union[edit]

Did the police union ever endorse Labor? It is my understanding that all the Police Unions in Australia are very closely connected to the conservative parties so it would be difficult for Labor to 'loose' an endorsement they never had it in the first place. Thanks, WikiTownsvillian 03:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The NSW Police Association is not (and never has been) affiliated with the NSW Labor Party, as the article claimed.
The Association has endorsed both major parties over time (including I think Labor in 1999), but is generally more inclined towards the Coalition. This is not surprising - historically, the Coalition has supported tougher penalties than the ALP. Debnam's current policies of locking up 200 unnamed Lebanese people "on day one" and making 10-year-olds criminally liable for offences, are cases in point.
The claim that "Labor has lost the endorsement" of the Association is not quite right - Labor didn't have it to begin with. However, if the Association has endorsed the Liberals this is a significant enough point to be mentioned in the article. Jeendan 03:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeendan will need to provide evidence of the above in order to use it in the editing of the article. The Telegraph article is the most credible secondary source available on the subject for now. Joestella 04:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Telegraph has never been a credible source on any subject. All my lifetime (55 years) it has been known as the Telecrap.--Grahamec 07:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See below. Jeendan 10:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Police Association is not an ALP affiliate[edit]

Once again - it is incorrect to state in the article that the Police Association is affiliated with the ALP. It is not, and never has been. The latest 'weasel words' version is to state 'affiliated with the Labor movement'. If this is supposed to imply affiliated with the Labor Party, it is incorrect. If this is to imply it is affiliated with the broad collection of organisations called unions, then that is true but meaningless. A statement that says a union is one of a group of organisations called unions is a pointless truism.

The point that the Police Association thinks the Liberals will do more for Police numbers is significant, and worth including in the article. There is no need to overstate the significance by adding falsehoods about ALP connections - the point stands on its own. Jeendan 08:48, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree they are weasel words and should be left out of the article, it would be like saying 'affiliated with Australian Businesses' every time McDonalds is mentioned... as Jeendan said, it is a pointless truism. WikiTownsvillian 12:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not an ALP affiliate, no (my mistake). The PANSW is affiliated to the Labor movement (Unions NSW, ACTU), as the organisation's website and the news report clearly state. Just as the decision of a major business or employer group to criticise the Liberals, or the NFF to criticise the Nats, would be noteworthy. Affiliation is a formal process, not a category. WikiTownsvillian's analogy ignores the structure and history of the labor movement. That said, the term trade union strongly implies the PANSW's link to the movement anyway, so we can leave it at that. Joestella 05:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe that the PANSW has ever been part of the Labor movement in any meaningful way.--Grahamec 07:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

QLD 2004 campaign[edit]

someone seems to think the qld alp slogan in 04 was "more to do but we're heading in the right direction". it was actually "keep queensland moving". i have rm the reference. ChampagneComedy 11:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do remember a slogan in the ALP's advertising which jingled: 'Heading in the right direction... putting Queensland first' or something like that, I'm 100% sure on the first part of the quote though because it rung a bell when I saw the phrase in this article. you can see the similarity between the two slogans/jingles but they are definitely not exactly the same. Thanks, WikiTownsvillian 11:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Everywhere across the state
It's working for Queensland
A helping hand, a friendly face
It's working for Queensland
Keep the team, build the dream
Keep Queensland moving
Keep the team, build the dream
Keep Queensland moving
Keep our state
The best on earth
Keep the team
Put Queensland first
Keep the team, build the dream
Keep Queensland moving
As I recall. ChampagneComedy? Joestella 14:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Election result[edit]

Unbelieveable, Joe. You don't think an article about an election campaign should mention the result? Jeendan 20:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions the result in the second sentence. Have a read, you might learn something. Joestella 04:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Charmed, I'm sure. I checked the edit summary and my edit adding the election result to the end of the article predates yours adding it to the start. At the time I added it, it did not appear in the second sentence (or anywhere else in the article).
If I can make a friendly suggestion, I think you need to calm down a bit about the various election articles, and pages like Maxine McKew. It's an online encyclopedia, not a street fight - there is no need for the hostile tone or edit warring with the anonymous user about the Latham quote. There are formal mechanisms for resolving these kind of disputes. It might also help resolve disputes if you discussed them on the talk pages before reverting.
Once again these are just suggestions - your edit style is of course, up to you. Jeendan 04:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At the time you left the message above, the result text was on the page. Jeendan, I realise that you think that Wikipedia is a legitimate forum for partisan brawling. Thankfully you generally restrict yourself to talk pages to do this. My suggestion would be to improve articles you feel are insufficiently NPOV, rather than attempting Peter Debnam sightings in the page histories. Joestella 05:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, Joestella. Your work on this page adding in press coverage of the campaign helped us to regain the seats of Manly and Pittwater. Now if only you can save my job from Barry O'Farrell? Peter Debnam 05:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joestella (talk • contribs) 16:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[1]

Well, your response makes it pretty clear you won't be heeding the 'calm down' suggestion. Thanks for the response, I don't understand the Debnam reference or why you double-posted using Debnam's name. Still, the suggestions were offered in good faith, and your view of them is clear and to the point. Jeendan 05:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Well, gang, we certainly cleared up the mystery of the Peter Debnam post pretty quickly. And with the iron-clad evidence Sarah collected, we should be able to get Joestella and Peter Debnam banned from Wikipedia for life. Joestella 14:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, OK. I'll resist the temptation to reply and just refer you back to my earlier posting in this section. Jeendan 22:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article just gets better and better[edit]

I like what ChampagneComedy has done with the campaign trail stuff - it reads less like a campaign blog and now omits some of the flash-in-the-pan news stories that Jeendan was so worried about. I had a go at doing the same to the last section, and added some of the opinion/analysis from the major papers. Plus there's more images. This article just gets better and better. Joestella 16:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like it too. Theme-based sections are much more useful now the campaign is over. And I appreciate your concern for my concern about flash-in-the-pan stories. How's that for an outbreak of peace and harmony? (and I haven't even edited Nola Fraser again) Jeendan 23:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SMH frontpage 2007-03-23.jpg[edit]

Image:SMH frontpage 2007-03-23.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Water for Life ad still.jpg[edit]

Image:Water for Life ad still.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:NSW Nurses 2007 Ad.jpg[edit]

Image:NSW Nurses 2007 Ad.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Water for Life ad still.jpg[edit]

Image:Water for Life ad still.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Debnam 20000.jpg[edit]

Image:Debnam 20000.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 12:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Costa tripodi sartor.jpg[edit]

Image:Costa tripodi sartor.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:SMH frontpage 2007-03-23.jpg[edit]

Image:SMH frontpage 2007-03-23.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Debnam Something is rotten.jpg[edit]

Image:Debnam Something is rotten.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:NSWLib LaborAdvertising.jpg[edit]

Image:NSWLib LaborAdvertising.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 15:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on New South Wales state election campaign, 2007. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:59, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New South Wales state election campaign, 2007. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 09:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2007_New_South_Wales_state_election_campaign&oldid=1196502583"