Talk:1996 Australian federal election
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1996 Australian federal election article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Seats changing hands edit
It appears that the Division of Isaacs also changed hands this election but is not listed here. Anyone got the appropriate numbers to fill in the table? --Stormie 04:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Result here. I believe it became notional Labor by way of redistribution before the election. I actually came across the wiki page and was going to mention it here, but noticed this! I think if the MP after the election is a different party to the MP before the election, or went notional opposition but was retained by the incumbent at the election, they both warrant a mention. Timeshift (talk) 13:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
When a Prime Minister quits his seat after losing an election edit
In Canada it is not uncommon for defeated Government leaders to immediately quit their seats despite just being reelected by his constituents. The boxes in these election articles stated that they have disclaimed reelection.
In Australian federal elections, there have been two occasions Fraser in 1983 and Keating in 1996 in which a defeated Prime Minister have immediately walked away from their seats yet the boxes in these articles made no note of this as they merely noted their respective seats. Perhaps this should be rectified as they have in effect disclaimed reelection. 122.106.83.10 (talk) 06:19, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Winning from Opposition edit
Looking at this edit, I have reverted it and others similar because it is unsourced.
I am unconvinced of the logic. Fraser may have technically been PM rather than OL when he advised an election, but only by a matter of hours. It could be said that his agreement with G-G Kerr was made as OL before being commissioned as PM. I'd like to see a RS making the same point, otherwise it comes across as editorial opinion in Wikivoice. Perhaps we could discuss it and come up with a consensus? --Pete (talk) 17:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Regardless of whether it is in a technical sense, the fact is the Coalition was the government in that campaign meaning it was them, not the ALP, that did the day to day running of things. 114.73.145.199 (talk) 01:27, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
- That's as may be, but it seems you are new around here. I have Reverted your Bold edits, which are unsourced, and we are Discussing them. That's WP:BRD Please do not edit-war until we find a WP:Consensus. There doesn't seem to be any hurry on your contribution, and if we can source it and get some agreement, it should be fine. --Pete (talk) 06:42, 8 November 2019 (UTC)