Talk:Mark McGowan

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 07:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

April 2008
I don't understand why the Minister of Education text (fully referenced) was removedfrom the article. It is all commentary of his performance as minister of Education and the decisions that he has made while in the position of Minister of Education. Surely this would count as part of a biography of any person? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.187.179 (talk) 09:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * In response to your point - reading the whole article in context, it was rather clear that it had fallen victim to undue weight issues relating to his current role. This is meant to be a biography, and it's been highly controversial as we seem to have rival organised groups, one supporting and adding McGowancruft to the article, and another who seem solely dedicated to bagging his decision making in Education. He can be rightly commented upon when he is clearly acting as himself - the criticism of his activities in 2005, for instance, or his rather conservative statements about education to the media when he first entered the role. But much of what Ministers do has very little to do with their own opinions, views, etc and often has a lot more to do with government policy as a whole, binding Cabinet decisions and the circumstances of the times. If it makes news (as opposed to the West), then certainly, put it up for discussion. But the last thing we need is BLP issues created by a misunderstanding of why we're here and what we're trying to achieve. Orderinchaos 09:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

How about the comments of his relating toward John D'Orazio? Surely they were in no way a part of any Cabinet decision and could be entered back into the article? Also if the WACOT remarks can stay in then surely the matters regarding the decision to send the SSTUWA before the IRC should be included as those were both decisions also made by the minister and not by the entire government? The comments were not bagging Mr McGowan in any way, the material hat I added was all on the public record, it directly involved Mr McGowan, they were all entirely factual and most importantly have an entirley Neutral Point of View. All of these matters have been covered by the West and the Australian newspapers as well as the ABC online edition (which were all referenced) It is possible that the pay dispute matters were an act of government but this was all handled under the reign of Mr McGowan as Minister of Ed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.187.179 (talk) 09:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Premier-elect or premier designate?
I'm not sure it can be "premier-elect" as premiers in Australia are not elected... at least, not by the general voters... and I don't think he has been elected in Parliament, either. The premier is appointed by the governor on the advice of the lower house, not an elected official per se. Jack N. Stock (talk) 04:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It's Premier-designate on the Premier of Western Australia page, after I initially had Premier-elect - I'm inclined to believe Premier-designate is more correct, but Prime Minister elect is commonly used, even if it's technically incorrect. I've changed his title on this page to Premier-designate for now - this will all be irrelevant within the next 24 hours regardless. AGTWSAWSPE (talk) 07:22, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 11 March 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: all moved. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 04:35, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

– subject has been elected head of government in Western Australia; move per WP:PTOPIC —MelbourneStar ☆ talk 13:04, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Mark McGowan (politician) → Mark McGowan
 * Mark McGowan → Mark McGowan (disambiguation)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000  ( talk,  contribs ) 19:51, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I contested your technical request because Mark McGowan would also need to be moved rather than deleted, and the politician article is not currently listed as the top most item on the disambiguation page. I need we need consensus to determine the primary topic. GeoffreyT2000  ( talk,  contribs ) 04:56, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Agree His election as premier makes him more notable than his namesakes, if he was not already. TFD (talk) 20:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support As head of government for the world's second-largest country subdivision, effectively controlling a budget of about $30 billion, he is much more notable (and polarizing) than the other two Mark McGowans. Jack N. Stock (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. Clearly primary topic. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 06:07, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per Jack N. Stock. Philip Terry Graham 16:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:RECENT. Politicians have a notoriously short shelf life and there is no indication of subject's notability on an international or even national scale. &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 22:11, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Please point out where in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is "international" or even "national" significance an indication of whether or not the subject is the primary topic? More so, the subject has been a politician for over 20 years, has been the leader of the opposition in the state since 2013, and is now the Premier of the state; so there goes your first argument also. —MelbourneStar ☆ talk 05:37, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per TFD and Jack N. Stock. Bmon94 (talk) 23:38, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support hard to make an argument that either of the other two could be considered primary topic, the Gaelic footballer no significant sources, the performer goes under the names Chunky Mark and The Artist Taxi Driver both of which are the more likely search terms for him. His body of work is extensive but its not significant given that the vast majority is for youtube with no major awards. I agree the politician has only just started a 4 year term as Premier this position in and of itself will generate significantly more media coverage, even him being replace would be a notable event.  Once you add 20 years of political life his impact is more than an average politican who serves one or two terms who doesnt lead the party or the government. Gnangarra 10:55, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support: WP:RECENT isn't a problem. He was the primary topic several years ago. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 05:03, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support as per Bob Carr, John Olsen, Dean Brown, et al. Easthillian (talk) 06:39, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support recentism is not a concern and the politician is the primary topic. Lepricavark (talk) 22:48, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak support. His election is very unlikely to be an historical anticlimax, barring unexpected development, he will be much more notable than the others. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:51, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mark McGowan. 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/20050909055721/http://www.abc.net.au/wa/stories/s1286424.htm to http://www.abc.net.au/wa/stories/s1286424.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080426093507/http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77 to http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=67289
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060820213005/http://www.wa.alp.org.au/people/people.html?seat=rockingham to http://www.wa.alp.org.au/people/people.html?seat=rockingham

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) 11:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

91%
Shouldn't the fact that Mr. McGowan managed to reach 91% of the vote in some polls be part of the polling section of the article? After all, reaching that level of support is basically unheard of, so it feels notable enough to include in the wiki article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by APenInSpace (talk • contribs) 10:12, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:44, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Premier of Western Australia.jpg

"criticised some politicians for calling attention to human rights in China"
The quoted text is original research, wikipedia is not a place to make politically-charged assumptions about motives. Nowhere in the cited articles is this claim even suggested. I removed this text a few months ago for that reason, but I see it has been restored with the dishonest edit summary saying that it was "blanked without explanation." I consider removing a highly disputable accusation with the reason being "unsupported by source" to be ample explanation, so I will be removing it again. &lt;Karlww (talk) 05:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I do agree with the removal. In addition to the sourcing issue you have stated, this statement lacks nuance and seems to be biased against McGowan. There is probably scope for including something about his statements on China, but any addition must be well sourced and nuanced. Steelkamp (talk) 13:25, 10 August 2022 (UTC)


 * I have just come back to look at this article again and I see the same user has restored the "blanked content." They added another source, however the new article offers no support for the claim, in fact it doesn't even mention anything about human rights. Even though a long time has passed I feel reluctant to revert again, but I will do it given this is a biography of a living person. &lt;Karlww (talk) 06:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Resignation date
Mark McGowan has stated that "This week will be my final week" and "Today I’m announcing that I’ll be stepping down as Premier and as Member for Rockingham". These quotes show that today is not the day he leaves office. We don't know the exact date yet that he will resign, and until then, McGowan remains premier and this article should reflect that. Steelkamp (talk) 07:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Another quote: "when Mr McGowan’s shock resignation becomes official later this week." Steelkamp (talk) 08:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Premier has resigned and Premieral succession has been triggered
Mark McGowen has resigned effective today and this triggers automatic succession (similar to the United States) by Deputy Premier Roger Cook. Why would they need a caucus when the position of Deputy Premier already exists? 123.243.118.76 (talk) 11:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? McGowan hasn't resigned yet, and there's no such thing as automatic succession in the Westminster system. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 11:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * You should read the message directly above yours. Mark McGowan has not actually resigned yet, only announced that he will resign. Anyway, the purpose of the deputy premier is for when the premier goes on leave or is otherwise unable to perform their duties. There is no automatic succession for when the premier permanently steps down. The party has to vote in a new premier, and it is often a different person to the deputy premier. Look at when Geoff Gallop or Brian Burke resigned. In both situations, the following premier was not the deputy premier. Steelkamp (talk) 12:13, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * McGowan has resigned, and Roger Cook has been named premier of Western Australia: https://www.perthnow.com.au/business/roger-cook-confirmed-as-western-australias-31st-premier-c-10891748 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joewardau (talk • contribs) 12:48, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * See https://www.watoday.com.au/politics/western-australia/mcgowan-s-next-ambition-live-an-ordinary-life-and-watch-some-netflix-20230602-p5ddgp.html. It says "As per constitutional requirements, he is officially on leave while his successor Roger Cook is acting in the role. Cook will be sworn in next Thursday, at which point McGowan will have officially resigned." Steelkamp (talk) 14:28, 7 June 2023 (UTC)