Talk:Australian Conservatives

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Australian Conservatives article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Australia: Politics Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Australian Conservatives 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	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.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force.

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Abortion

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Abortion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AbortionWikipedia:WikiProject AbortionTemplate:WikiProject AbortionAbortion articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Article merge proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was not to merge. Closed per WP:SNOW - with these pages being in the news it's not helpful keeping this discussion open. There was no argument advanced in favour of the merge, and strong arguments against. St Anselm (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a discussion section for the article merge proposed this evening following the revelation that Family First Party is expected to announce on 26 April that it will merge into Australian Conservatives.

Oppose The two parties have significantly different history, Family First having been established in 2001. It will be simpler to keep the history (including "Split from the Liberal Party" for the AC) separate in two distinct articles. It will not be hard to record that FF dissolved or merged into AC, and that AC absorbed most FF members. The two SA MLCs will be recorded as having changed parties. --Scott Davis ^Talk 14:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose These are two organisations with distinct histories. Timrollpickering 14:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The parties joining forces now does not erase their distinct histories. Frickeg (talk) 22:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cadbury?[edit]

Can anyone explain why the See Also section includes a link to Cadbury? I'm confused over what a confectionary company has to do with a political party! As far as I can see the change was made by B20097 back on the 16 August 2017 and not reverted as most of the changes were productive. Should it be removed? 人族 (talk) 05:47, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably intended to link to the carry-on about chocolate eggs that is in the article from April 2017. It's also sort-of mentioned in the Cadbury article, but the Conservatives aren't. I'm happy to drop the "See also" link. --Scott Davis ^Talk 06:23, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Membership numbers unverified[edit]

The membership number listed is categorically wrong and the article cited makes no reference to the 15,000 figure. 13,000 is the figure given by Bernardi (www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/greg-sheridan/bernardi-continues-to-build-his-national-membership-power-base/news-story/fc1c565e936ffb36e673ad4f0eae73c1+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au) but this is also unverified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.56.211.109 (talk) 02:39, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]