Talk:Division of Casey

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Australia: Melbourne / Politics Low‑importance

	Australia portal Division of Casey 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Low-importance).
	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.

Named while Casey was still alive[edit]

Lord Casey did not die until 1976. Isn't it normal practice to name electorates after people only after their death? Why was an exception made in this case? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:00, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This blog has some interesting background. Watson and Bruce were also named after living people. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 15:15, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since I live in Casey, the name has always intrigued me. Not so much the timing, as the location. It's not where Richard Casey ever lived (so far as I can tell). The closest he lived was in the Berwick area, and his name has been given to the city Berwick is now part of. So why did this electorate get his name? HiLo48 (talk) 02:54, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Electoral Commission doesn't consider where specifically in a state someone is from - as long as they are generally seen as "from" a certain state then their name can be applied anywhere in that state. Casey is actually vastly closer than, say, Isaacs (who lived in Shepparton) or Lalor (obviously a Bendigo man) or the new proposed seat of Fraser (in western Melbourne rather than western rural Victoria). Very few seats have an actual geographical connection to their dedicatee. Frickeg (talk) 22:36, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Except, as you say, they are put in the same state. So they do have a connection. Just a very arbitrary one. Since the majority of voters wouldn't know the name of their seat anyway (admittedly purely personal research there), the AEC could do a complete rename across a state to have it all make more sense, and it would hardly upset anyone. HiLo48 (talk) 23:29, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The City of Casey was formed in 1994 by the merger of most of the City of Berwick with parts of Shire of Cranbourne (including Cranbourne itself), and the Churchill Park Drive estate within the City of Knox. So, there is - or was - a connection to Berwick there. But, no doubt due to boundary changes in the interim, there is no part of the current City of Casey that is in the current Division of Casey. You're either in Flinders, Holt or La Trobe. Not sure whether the new redistribution changes any of that.

Very similar to Werriwa, in western Sydney, Gough Whitlam's old electorate. It was originally named after the indigenous name for Lake George, close to Canberra, as it then incorporated that area. But it's now 2 hours drive north of Lake George. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:48, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]