User talk:The Shadow Treasurer

==

No Messages please

== I do not wish to be contacted about anything until this message is removed by me as I do not have the time to respond to messages regarding edit summaries that I have made. The Shadow Treasurer (talk) 22:38, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reith

"as well as losing the Deputy Leadership in the post-election ballot" suggests he was actually defeated in a ballot. My memory is that he didn't recontest the Deputy Leadership, but it is a while ago and my memory may not be correct. Adam 04:06, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello The Shadow Treasurer,

Welcome and enjoy Wikipedia. Your edits are much appreciated.

These links might help you with your contributions:

For Wikipedia-wide involvement, visit the Communtiy Portal and the Village Pump.

Be sure to check out Australian resources, like The Australia Wikiportal, Australian Wikipedians' Notice Board, Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight, New Australian Articles and Australian stub articles. You can list yourself at Australian Wikipedians.

Also, just a tip, when posting comments sign with four tildes (i.e. ~~~~). Alternatively, you can use the signature button located at the top of edit boxes.

Again, welcome.--Cyberjunkie 03:11, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, The Shadow Treasurer. Please sign and date your posts on talk pages by using four tildes ~~~~. It just makes the discussions easier to follow. Cheers. Slac speak up! 04:50, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Laborite / Labor Party member / ALP member

You asked "Just like to know for the Joe Lyons article why you changed Laborite to Labor Party member I mean I find it much preferrable to refer to an ALP member as Laborite rather than Labor Party member."

I find the word Laborite laboured and not in common usage (perhaps it is used within the party). I don't like acronyms if they can be avoided hence I would not use ALP in preference to Labor.

Please sign your comments on talk pages with ~~~~. You should find the second button from the right immediately above the editing window inserts these automatically for you.

Regards --AYArktos 00:56, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As mentioned above, I prefer not to use acronyms, they are not always easy for the unfamiliar reader to translate and can sometimes refer to more than one thing - this context it is probably quite easy. However, for example, where I work an SME can refer to a subject matter expert or a small/medium enterprise and thus, in general, acronyms have come to be regarded as bad form.

Since the Lyons article is obviously about an Australian and the article has already referred to the Labor party (with the wiki link in the first paragraph being abbreviated from Australian Labor Party), I believe it is accepted style to refer to the party in that manner. I see Laborite as a term familiar to the cognoscenti and not general readership. Regards--AYArktos 01:23, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You are correct that I would avoid referring to "the Republican Party in the States as GOP and the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan, LDP" even though they are both well known internationally - I note our local Austrlaian papers also tend to not refer to GOP or LDP but to Rupblicans and the Liberal Democratic Party - as they like us are writing for a general not a specialised readership. I could probably translate GOP but would not be able to do so readily - Republicans is a much easier reference term. Regards--AYArktos 08:07, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Abbott

Tony Abbott

Do not understand why my contribution on Tony Abbott was removed. It was very relevant about the man himself the fact that he was the Liberal leadership candidate who had previous experience in Opposition and yet did not get the top job at the end.--The Shadow Treasurer (talk) 12:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See bottom dotpoint of new template addition at very top of Talk:Tony Abbott. It was a reflection on the subject, not the article. Timeshift (talk) 13:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Survivors

Hello, The Shadow Treasurer. You have new messages at DeadlyAssassin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

February 2011

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to The Dark Knight (film). Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.-5- (talk) 07:23, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't contact me again. My remarks was based on my memory and I regard your remarks to be an affrontery as you were questioning my memory of the situation. The Shadow Treasurer (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Who

Sorry, but multiple independent and reliable sources contradict your point of view. Wikipedia works on verifiability, not "truth". I've reverted your changes to the Dr Who page. There's plenty of evidence to suggest the world views Dr Who as "cult". Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:31, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

courtesy note

Just noting I replied to your question on 1955 election with a source. Orderinchaos 00:20, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trivialities

Menzies, Fraser, and Howard all lost elections. Holt and Gorton were the only ones on the Liberal side who won all of their election contests (one election each), which was out of the chance and happenstance of a PM going missing presumed dead as well as Liberal Party instability. Those PMs who win all and lose none occur through chance and the situation of the time, it's not through some sort of skill. It's an irrelevant statistic. Timeshift (talk) 05:47, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Senators from 1975

I noticed that you have altered several articles of Australian Senators who began their terms in 1975 (such as Mal Colston and Brian Harradine) as having their terms start on 1 July 1976—this is incorrect, I'm afraid. The Australian federal election, 1975 was a double dissolution election, so the normal terms did not apply. The Senate had been dissolved and Senators elected in 1975 took their seats immediately, i.e. on 13 December 1975. --Canley (talk) 02:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Pittwater state by-election, 2005, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- MST☆R ^{(Merry Christmas!)} 05:24, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]