Jump to content

Talk:Candidates of the 1906 Australian federal election

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pappubahry (talk | contribs) at 13:06, 3 March 2015 (Batman independents). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAustralia: Politics List‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconCandidates of the 1906 Australian federal election 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.
ListThis article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Low-importance).
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Batman independents

Vernon and Painter are currently listed as Ind Lab. I'm changing Vernon and Ind Prot based on this article. I've turned Painter into just an 'Ind'; I don't have much of an idea about him, but he wrote a letter to the Argus saying "I am decidedly opposed to the so-called socialists." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pappubahry (talkcontribs) 12:41, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is another listing that came from Psephos originally. It might be worth shooting Adam Carr an email to see where he got some of these designations - he's usually pretty willing to respond. Frickeg (talk) 12:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'll definitely get in touch with Adam at some point -- I just want to organise all the corrections I have for him first, and I have a little bit more checking to do. For most elections my reading of Trove accords pretty well with both what was here and what's in Psephos, and any errors are obvious, but for the very early elections (and 1901 in particular), he must have some other source(s) describing the official party endorsements. Pappubahry (talk) 13:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]