Talk:Mark Parnell

Greens pages really need to be rallied
Not sure if you've noticed, but compared with the Family First pollies (Robert Brokenshire and Dennis Hood), the pages for Mark Parnell and Tammy Franks are tiny. This is surprising given the Greens tend to get around 13% of the vote, whereas FFP only get around 5%. There needs to be increased referencing, academic rigor, and content. Twigfan (talk) 10:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have a good reference in mind or were you just thinking of linking to policy statements? Donama (talk) 23:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * What the contributor should understand is that we don't have twice as much article content for the Greens as the FFP, and five times as much for major party MPs. It just doesn't work like that. Those that are the most controversial or noteable will get the largest articles. I'd say it all speaks for itself really. Timeshift (talk) 05:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * But it still doesn't make sense the Robert Brokenshire and Dennis Hood articles can be sourced like crazy, whereas Mark Parnell and Tammy Franks has essentially nothing. I'd concur with User:Donama and say, we just link to their policy statements? Twigfan (talk) 07:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mark Parnell. 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/20061004115946/http://www.edo.org.au/edosa/ to http://edo.org.au/edosa/

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) 12:42, 3 June 2017 (UTC)