Talk:Government of New South Wales/Archive 1

Elections, dates, results
Should there be something about election dates & results? E.g. I was trying to remember if the last election was 2003 or 2004. (google found it - 2003). --Singkong2005 06:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

That would belong at Elections in New South Wales, which you are welcome to create. Adam 06:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with Adam Carr, above. There should be a more general, historical coverage of the NSW Government - which outlines elections and parliament structures etc - as opposed to the current NSW Government, as presently outlined. This page is almost identical to the two linked pages at the bottom - the Ministry and Shadow Ministry pages - and is pretty useless. 149.171.160.111 (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Update
I've updated the table making it valid as at 18 May 2011. I've matched up the shadow ministers with their obvious government counterparts but there's still a few gaps. As well as the gaps in text, I'm not sure to which minsters the following shadow ministries should be matched. If someone could finish these off, that'd be great. The shadow minsiters are:
 * Luke Foley Shadow Minister for Water
 * Cherie Burton Shadow Minister for Volunteering and Youth
 * Robert Furolo Shadow Minister for Housing
 * Mick Veitch Shadow Minister for Regional and Rural Affairs
 * Sophie Cotsis Industrial Relations

Regarding the removal of wikilinks from the various ministry titles (e.g. Minister of Education etc), I wasn't sure whether the titles should link to their own article (Minister of...) or to the relevant govt department. Could someone please re-add the appropriate links? Thank you.

By the way, there's obviously a shortage of images. Perhaps the contact mentioned at the bottom of this page may be useful in obtaining more.

LordVetinari (talk) 14:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Ministries
The ministries were not updated after the last election!

This article doesn't seem to be very active but hopefully people are watching. I have tried to fix it and am about halfway through matching the ministries with the shadow ministries but I'm stuck now as I'm having trouble with the visual editor. I'm not confident to continue. I put in a call for help at the WikiProject Australia page. If you want to finish it off I'd appreciate the help. The list of shadow ministers is in the References so that part is easy. You just need to be good with tables. (I am not.) Mkultraviolence (talk) 07:50, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

He's right. Jillian Skinner resigned from Parliament. Duncan Gay is no longer in cabinet. Melinda Pavey has joined cabinet. For a current list with mugshots see https://www.nsw.gov.au/your-government/ministers/ Jswd (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Government of New South Wales. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150120000825/http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/members.nsf/V3ListCurrentMinisters to http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/members.nsf/V3ListCurrentMinisters
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150103074103/http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/members.nsf/V3ListCurrentShadow to http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/members.nsf/V3ListCurrentShadow
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081207165656/http://publications.nsw.gov.au/ to http://publications.nsw.gov.au/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:46, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 31 May 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved by strong consensus. Andrewa (talk) 09:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Government of New South Wales → NSW Government – The NSW Government refers to itself as the NSW Government, and has done so for a substantial amount of time. It's the WP:COMMONNAME for the government, and moreover, is the official name (WP:NCGAL). The Government is called the NSW Government in legislation: Lake Macquarie Smelter Site (Perpetual Care of Land) Act 2019, Modern Slavery Act 2018 No 30, State Debt Recovery Act 2018 No 11, Aboriginal Languages Act 2017 No 51. The government's own logo says NSW Government too. ItsPugle (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: The proposed use of abbreviation does not seem to have an appropriately formal tone for an encyclopedia and may not be recognizable to many readers outside of Australia. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:41, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose abbreviation. 98.143.75.50 (talk) 14:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per MOS:ABBR and WP:RECOGNIZABLE. "NSW" is meaningless to most people outside of Australia and nearby countries like New Zealand.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  12:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Absolutely not. Use of abbreviations in article titles is usually a terrible idea. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.

Requested move 28 September 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Consensus to not move. (closed by non-admin page mover)   SITH   (talk)   12:48, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Government of New South Wales → NSW Government – The NSW Government refers to itself as the NSW Government, and has done so for a substantial amount of time. As per:
 * WP:COMMONNAME: Google Trends shows that the very significant majority of (almost all) sources use "NSW Government", which is also supported in the findings from Google Ngram
 * WP:OFFICIALNAME: the NSW Government is officially called the NSW Government as per their website and various legislation (1, 2, 3, 4)
 * WP:NCGAL: the naming conventions for government and legislation specify to always use the official name unless their is a significant majority usage of the common name, which are both the same here.
 * WP:CRITERIA: all five criteria preference the use of "NSW Government":
 * Recognisability - as per the evidence for WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NCGAL, the government is most commonly known by "NSW Government"
 * Naturalness - NSW is very commonly simply called NSW - you can see this in a range of sources, including news and media, and scholarly sources
 * Precision - no other entity is called the "NSW Government" in any form - this can be seen in the way that NSW Government already redirects without disambiguation to this article
 * Conciseness and WP:CONCISE - this cuts out the unnecessary "of" in the article title, and condenses the expanded state name to its common abbreviation
 * Consistency - all other Australian government and New Zealand Government articles have been moved in the past 6 months to their more common and official names, so editors talking about NSW Government, especially since it's a state government so it has limited international impact, would likely expect to find the article at "NSW Government".

For any concerns about abbreviations the abbreviation in page titles policy explains this is a perfectly fine abbreviation. Both benchmarks for using abbreviations (commonality as per WP:COMMONNAME and the common understanding of "NSW" as meaning New South Wales) have been met. You can see this too in the two sources it provides for checking abbreviation meanings: abbreviations.com and acryonymfinder.com - both have New South Wales as the first result for "NSW", and as the only logical expanded phrase for "NSW Government" (unless you want to say that "No Significant Weather Government" is a logical expansion). ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:10, 28 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose move. Too soon after the last RM, so it's likely to end the same way.  O.N.R.  (talk) 06:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * It's been almost four months and I'm presenting a more thought out and described request that addresses the only concerns risen by the previous RM and highlights eight different policies that support moving the article. Do you have any policy or supported objections other than just "it's likely to end the same way"? ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 09:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose NSW may not be that easily recognisable to people outside Australia, could have other meanings in other countries. PatGallacher (talk) 13:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Fails WP:NCA.  CIA and FBI and ANZAC are at their full names, despite those abbreviations being far more recognizable. Tevildo (talk) 20:19, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:WHATABOUT. NCA literally says that CIA is an outlier because the full name is used in scholarly sources, something which isn't the case here as I've already demonstrated. I've already shown how the two benchmarks for using abbreviations, commonality and understanding of the abbreviation, both support using the abbreviation. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * There's also been no discussion on Australian and New Zealand Army Corps about using ANZUS as the article title, and the last move discussion for FBI was four years ago with no reference to NCA. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose per MOS:ACROTITLE. There is a high bar for using acronyms in titles, and this article doesn't reach it. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose this proposal (abbreviation), Support only to New South Wales Government, which aligns with the "(place) + Government" convention. The latter is also how people pronounce it; people do not pronounce "N S W Government", they pronounce it as "New South Wales Government". Marcnut1996 (talk) 01:36, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm okay with New South Wales Government if the consensus is still (again despite MOS:NCA not being an issue) against using the abbreviation. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment for any concerns about the use of an abbreviation (WP:NCA), I defer to my statement in my rationale. The two tests given to see if an abbreviation is appropriate both demonstrate that it is - it's most commonly (by a very very very large margin) called the "NSW Government", and it's universally understood that "NSW" is an abbreviation for New South Wales. Despite 's assertion that it "could have other meanings in other countries", both sources given on the policy page show that this is not the case. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 06:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment The issue is that "NSW" is not "universally understood". It may be so understood in Australia, but not throughout the English-speaking world.  New South Wales Government would seem to be unobjectionable, so I would recommend that as an alternative proposal. Tevildo (talk) 09:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose for reasons already given by others. Questzonz (talk) 06:49, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment - How do we feel about using New South Wales Government? While I still think NSW Government is the most appropriate per every relevant policy, it seems as though I'm the lone wolf in this. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 04:58, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Abbreviations are usually a terrible idea. Far clearer as it is. And it's never a good idea to continue proposing moves until you get the result you want. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * With all respect for your experience, there is no provision that prevents re-suggesting a move request. Also, this is the second time that this RM has ever been put forward, so it hardly fits the description of forcing "moves until [I] get the result [I] want" which is what it sounds like you're insinuating. You'll also notice that my rationale for this RM is very very substantially more detailed then the previous RM, effectively suggesting a move for a completely different reason - as far as my experience with RMs, it's perfectly fine to reopen RMs after a few months with significantly expanded rationales. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 11:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.