Template talk:New Zealand political parties

Comment
This template is now redundant now that there is a Category system. Category:New Zealand political parties achieves a similar role to this template. Alan Liefting 20:25, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * That was my view too, but User:Wilfried Derksen disagreed. (I believe he also wanted all elections linked from all party pages, and all parties linked from all election pages, too). Still, if there's sufficient consensus that they should go, I have no objections at all (even though I created this template). See also Template:Historic New Zealand political parties. -- Vardion 21:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It is a nice template and a handy single click to other parties. I am now undecided as to whether it should stay or go. Alan Liefting 21:57, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I retract my previous opinion. It is a good template. Alan Liefting 9 July 2005 07:32 (UTC)

Comment
What's the criteria for inclusion inthis template? At present it includes Parliamentary parties, registered parties, unregistered parties, and some which seem to be defunct. It would be nice to have a clear criteria, or to have a further split between registered parties (which can contest the party list) and unregistered onces )which can't). IdiotSavant (talk) 03:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria
In the absence of further guidance, I propose the following inclusion criteria for the "unregistered" section:


 * If the party ran candidates in the previous election;
 * If the party was registered at the previous election;
 * If the party has announced its intention to register or run candidates at the next election.

Parties which announce that they will no longer be active should not be included.--IdiotSavant (talk) 09:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * That sounds sensible. Once the next election date is announced, then parties which might meet the first two criteria, but haven't been heard of since, might also be dropped, so only parties with some relevance to the upcoming election are included.- gadfium 18:29, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with Gadfium's comments.  Schwede 66  19:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * With the deregistration of the New World Order Party, they should be (re?)moved. Quadparty (talk) 01:38, 16 June 2011 (UTC)