Talk:Labor Left: Difference between revisions
JarrahTree (talk | contribs) earlier comments |
|||
(47 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header}} |
|||
{{WP Australia|politics=yes}} |
|||
{{WikiProject banner shell |blp=other |class=start |1= |
|||
{{WikiProject Australia |importance=low |politics=yes |politics-importance=mid}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Politics |importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Socialism |importance=low}} |
|||
}} |
|||
{{Australian English}} |
|||
{{Annual readership}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
| algo = old(30d) |
|||
| archive = Talk:Labor Left/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
| counter = 1 |
|||
| maxarchivesize = 150K |
|||
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|||
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
| minthreadsleft = 3 |
|||
}} |
|||
== Moving membership list to Category:Labor Left politicians == |
|||
==earlier comments== |
|||
what a load of tripe this article is. one day when i'm feeling like a fight i will rewrite it. [[User:Adam Carr|Adam]] 12:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
This page currently contains long table entitled 'Federal Members of the Left'. This seems out of place; both because it's the sort of information which can easily be consolidated into a category page, and because this page is about the Labor Left on a State and Territory level, not just a National. |
|||
Each day I feel like a fight. [[User:DarrenRay|DarrenRay]] 12:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I'm proposing that this table be removed and the information instead be consolidated into Category:Labor Left politicians. That category is currently a catch-all, but can be expanded to include sub-categories for each jurisdiction across the country. [[User:Paperclip Maximiser|Paperclip Maximiser]] ([[User talk:Paperclip Maximiser|talk]]) 22:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC) |
|||
i'm not quite as combative as you. but i am patient, and thorough. so it will get done. [[User:Adam Carr|Adam]] 12:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Done''' - have removed list and placed a category link at the top of the page after nobody raised dissent here. [[User:Paperclip Maximiser|Paperclip Maximiser]] ([[User talk:Paperclip Maximiser|talk]]) 23:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't think you'd be up for much of a fight. It's a lousy article, and we don't have any SL warriors (yet) to be a nuisance about it. It'd also be nice to have a more thorough list of MPs. Is that information available elsewhere online at all? [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 02:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Why is describing Labor Left as centre-left to left erroneous? == |
|||
I was kidding of course, I think it's an interesting subject that should be given a comprehensive discussion. I will follow your lead on it and hopefully add some spicy references from the recent past. I will closely peruse references to the group by Andrew Bolt and the Herald Sun more generally. [[User:DarrenRay|DarrenRay]] 00:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
I made an edit describing this "Left" faction of a centre-left party as centre-left to left and it was reverted I'd to know why. After all, one ideology of this faction that is listed in the infobox is democratic socialism, which is a left to far-left ideology, so what is the problem. Before editing, I checked this talk page for consensus against such a change and found none, so I saw no reason not to make this change. [[User:Fuse809|<span style = "color:green">'''Fuse809'''</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Fuse809|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Fuse809|email]] · [[User_talk:Fuse809|talk]] · [[Commons:Special:ListFiles/Fuse809|uploads]]) 10:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC) |
|||
:Somehow I think there might be better sources for information about the SL than Mr. Bolt. [[User:Ambi|Ambi]] 02:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:They're not that left, and making it on the basis of a philosophical statement in the infobox without any actual knowledge of the subject is unhelpful. [[User:The Drover's Wife|The Drover's Wife]] ([[User talk:The Drover's Wife|talk]]) 10:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC) |
|||
I'm pretty certain this article is wrong to use the title "Socialist Left" for the whole Left in federal Caucus and in all the state branches. Certainly in Caucus it is called the "National Left". There is an SL in Victoria, and in Qld, and I think also in SA, but I don't believe the NSW Left uses that name. The article ought to be rewritten to reflect these facts. Perhaps it should called [[Australian Labor Party Left]] and these matters discussed there. In the interim, I am going to remove the list of federal MPs and put them in a new article, [[Australian Labor Party Caucus 2004-2007]], where I will list all MPs and Senators by faction. [[User:Intelligent Mr Toad|Intelligent Mr Toad]] 07:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:In NSW the faction is the Socialist Left as well (as it correctly points out in the article)--[[User:203.166.110.82|203.166.110.82]] 01:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
::OK, how did you judge it as centre-left and not more left? What objective evidence do you have to say it is centre-left? Because, I'm quite sure what it comes down to is what you ''think'' it is, not something you have a heap of political scientists to say is the case. I can't find a clear list of their policies, via Google searching (as they do not seem to have a separate website, unless you count nswleft.com, which is only their NSW Faction), nor by looking at this Wiki article. But, based on their ideologies, which was most of what I had to go by, I thought, it must be centre-left to left-wing. [[User:Fuse809|<span style = "color:green">'''Fuse809'''</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Fuse809|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Fuse809|email]] · [[User_talk:Fuse809|talk]] · [[Commons:Special:ListFiles/Fuse809|uploads]]) 10:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC) |
|||
I have now done this. There are a few gaps which devoted faction-watchers can no doubt fill in for me. [[User:Intelligent Mr Toad|Intelligent Mr Toad]] 08:36, 15 March 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::This is a silly thing to say when you've not only got no objective evidence for the changes you're trying to make to the long-established text, but you don't know anything about the subject at all. It would be better to remove the "democratic socialism" because although there's a historical argument for its presence it can't really be applied to the present-day faction (most members would not remotely identify their politics as "socialist", and their current candidate for Labor leader is one of the most anti-socialist people in the party) and, as this conversation demonstrates, this can be very confusing to randos stumbling upon the article. [[User:The Drover's Wife|The Drover's Wife]] ([[User talk:The Drover's Wife|talk]]) 13:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC) |
|||
:: I was asking for their policies or other pieces of evidence to back up your belief they're just centre-left, preferably in an official list (as opposed to what you just say here, because I would like something more concrete than just someone's say so on this talk page) of sorts, and instead of showing me evidence of this you're just acting snobby. Please, I'm trying to learn here, because you're telling me I'm ignorant, and instead you're focusing on just putting me down. [[User:Fuse809|<span style = "color:green">'''Fuse809'''</span>]] ([[Special:Contributions/Fuse809|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Fuse809|email]] · [[User_talk:Fuse809|talk]] · [[Commons:Special:ListFiles/Fuse809|uploads]]) 13:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC) |
|||
== Redraft collaborators == |
|||
:::I mean policy will be hard to find, and giving examples wouldn't be the best thing because I think it would end up as a policy war. |
|||
:::However recently in QLD since the left finally had a Left Premier-Caucus-Majority in Conference, they announced a centralisation and de privatisation of the bus system in QLD, public owned energy providers, and public owned fuel stations. Along with the idea of moving towards a 100% government owned energy production network which they wanted to legislate. |
|||
I will happily collaborate in creating a NPOV article. The left faction of the ALP.--[[User:Fred.e|Fred.e]] 21:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:::I don't think again this proves they "Are socialist" since that would be a whole discussion on peoples political views vs their praxis. What we can gauge is that at the very least they advertise themselves as democratic socialist, push for government ownership of services, and academics list them as democratic socialist. [[User:DirectorDirectorDirector|DirectorDirectorDirector]] ([[User talk:DirectorDirectorDirector|talk]]) 10:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: That sounds like a good one - or just Labor Left (which currently redirects to this one). I'm not sure how we would go about referencing it though. I tend to agree with Adam's comment at the very top of this page - the entire article is a mess and contains several unproven (and IMO non-factual) assertions. At least one of the MPs on this list, while left-wing, would most definitely not use "socialist", and "Socialist Left" doesn't even exist in WA and probably other states too (I can only talk about what I know). I would have tried to improve this article but most of what I know would constitute [[WP:OR]]. [[User talk:Orderinchaos78|Orderinchaos78]] 15:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Wow, this thread is so ages ago now and editors are still going back and forwards on this. Personally I think if there's going to be any change from the [[WP:QUO]] we need academic sources from subject matter expects. |
|||
:Pinging @[[User:Strong1891|Strong1891]], @[[User:Vif12vf|Vif12vf]], @[[User:Helper201|Helper201]], @[[User:ZlatanSweden10|ZlatanSweden10]], @[[User:MrFluffster|MrFluffster]] and @[[User:Loytra|Loytra]] who have edited over this since April 2023. Sorry if I've missed anyone. Pinging @[[User:Fuse809|Fuse809]] and @[[User:The Drover's Wife|The Drover's Wife]] as participants in this existing thread. |
|||
== Weasel Words == |
|||
:Can we please have some discussion going so that there isn't needless editing going backwards and forwards please. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''<sup>[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]</sup> 12:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Based on reading and sources I now find it hard to consider it in "Left". Although I think we can and should keep "democratic socialism", a faction that is democratic socialist but believes in reformism and pushing Labor from within seems hard to place in the left. |
|||
Particulary these lines. |
|||
:The problem I am also finding is that most academic articles speaking on factions don't really use the "Left" and "centre-left" stuff all too often and focus on ideology. [[User:DirectorDirectorDirector|DirectorDirectorDirector]] ([[User talk:DirectorDirectorDirector|talk]]) 10:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
''Federal party leader Gough Whitlam sought to use the 1970 intervention to modernise the Victorian branch and increase its chances of electoral success. Some have argued that this was a move to decrease the influence of the left-wing Victorian branch. This second point has been one of considerable contention with subsequent electoral results in Victoria being inconclusive.'' |
|||
Who said this? It's important. Furthermore I challenge the idea the subsequent results are inconclusive... but I'm not going to argue that here... but sources people! Sources! [[User:Teiresias84|Teiresias84]] 00:42, 16 July 2007 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 10:05, 2 December 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Labor Left article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Moving membership list to Category:Labor Left politicians
[edit]This page currently contains long table entitled 'Federal Members of the Left'. This seems out of place; both because it's the sort of information which can easily be consolidated into a category page, and because this page is about the Labor Left on a State and Territory level, not just a National.
I'm proposing that this table be removed and the information instead be consolidated into Category:Labor Left politicians. That category is currently a catch-all, but can be expanded to include sub-categories for each jurisdiction across the country. Paperclip Maximiser (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
- Done - have removed list and placed a category link at the top of the page after nobody raised dissent here. Paperclip Maximiser (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Why is describing Labor Left as centre-left to left erroneous?
[edit]I made an edit describing this "Left" faction of a centre-left party as centre-left to left and it was reverted I'd to know why. After all, one ideology of this faction that is listed in the infobox is democratic socialism, which is a left to far-left ideology, so what is the problem. Before editing, I checked this talk page for consensus against such a change and found none, so I saw no reason not to make this change. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 10:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- They're not that left, and making it on the basis of a philosophical statement in the infobox without any actual knowledge of the subject is unhelpful. The Drover's Wife (talk) 10:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- OK, how did you judge it as centre-left and not more left? What objective evidence do you have to say it is centre-left? Because, I'm quite sure what it comes down to is what you think it is, not something you have a heap of political scientists to say is the case. I can't find a clear list of their policies, via Google searching (as they do not seem to have a separate website, unless you count nswleft.com, which is only their NSW Faction), nor by looking at this Wiki article. But, based on their ideologies, which was most of what I had to go by, I thought, it must be centre-left to left-wing. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 10:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- This is a silly thing to say when you've not only got no objective evidence for the changes you're trying to make to the long-established text, but you don't know anything about the subject at all. It would be better to remove the "democratic socialism" because although there's a historical argument for its presence it can't really be applied to the present-day faction (most members would not remotely identify their politics as "socialist", and their current candidate for Labor leader is one of the most anti-socialist people in the party) and, as this conversation demonstrates, this can be very confusing to randos stumbling upon the article. The Drover's Wife (talk) 13:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- OK, how did you judge it as centre-left and not more left? What objective evidence do you have to say it is centre-left? Because, I'm quite sure what it comes down to is what you think it is, not something you have a heap of political scientists to say is the case. I can't find a clear list of their policies, via Google searching (as they do not seem to have a separate website, unless you count nswleft.com, which is only their NSW Faction), nor by looking at this Wiki article. But, based on their ideologies, which was most of what I had to go by, I thought, it must be centre-left to left-wing. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 10:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- I was asking for their policies or other pieces of evidence to back up your belief they're just centre-left, preferably in an official list (as opposed to what you just say here, because I would like something more concrete than just someone's say so on this talk page) of sorts, and instead of showing me evidence of this you're just acting snobby. Please, I'm trying to learn here, because you're telling me I'm ignorant, and instead you're focusing on just putting me down. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 13:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- I mean policy will be hard to find, and giving examples wouldn't be the best thing because I think it would end up as a policy war.
- However recently in QLD since the left finally had a Left Premier-Caucus-Majority in Conference, they announced a centralisation and de privatisation of the bus system in QLD, public owned energy providers, and public owned fuel stations. Along with the idea of moving towards a 100% government owned energy production network which they wanted to legislate.
- I don't think again this proves they "Are socialist" since that would be a whole discussion on peoples political views vs their praxis. What we can gauge is that at the very least they advertise themselves as democratic socialist, push for government ownership of services, and academics list them as democratic socialist. DirectorDirectorDirector (talk) 10:05, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I was asking for their policies or other pieces of evidence to back up your belief they're just centre-left, preferably in an official list (as opposed to what you just say here, because I would like something more concrete than just someone's say so on this talk page) of sorts, and instead of showing me evidence of this you're just acting snobby. Please, I'm trying to learn here, because you're telling me I'm ignorant, and instead you're focusing on just putting me down. Fuse809 (contribs · email · talk · uploads) 13:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- Wow, this thread is so ages ago now and editors are still going back and forwards on this. Personally I think if there's going to be any change from the WP:QUO we need academic sources from subject matter expects.
- Pinging @Strong1891, @Vif12vf, @Helper201, @ZlatanSweden10, @MrFluffster and @Loytra who have edited over this since April 2023. Sorry if I've missed anyone. Pinging @Fuse809 and @The Drover's Wife as participants in this existing thread.
- Can we please have some discussion going so that there isn't needless editing going backwards and forwards please. TarnishedPathtalk 12:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
- Based on reading and sources I now find it hard to consider it in "Left". Although I think we can and should keep "democratic socialism", a faction that is democratic socialist but believes in reformism and pushing Labor from within seems hard to place in the left.
- The problem I am also finding is that most academic articles speaking on factions don't really use the "Left" and "centre-left" stuff all too often and focus on ideology. DirectorDirectorDirector (talk) 10:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- Start-Class Australia articles
- Low-importance Australia articles
- Start-Class Australian politics articles
- Mid-importance Australian politics articles
- WikiProject Australian politics articles
- WikiProject Australia articles
- Start-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- Start-Class socialism articles
- Low-importance socialism articles
- WikiProject Socialism articles
- Wikipedia articles that use Australian English