 | This article was nominated for deletion on 6 September 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Untitled edit
- Does this mean the nominated for deletion message can be removed now? Djapa Owen 06:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djapa84 (talk • contribs)
- Yep, once it's closed, the notice should be removed. I've gone ahead and done it. Orderinchaos 13:55, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
discussion of the article edit
If Niblock is the party's leader, then what is the status of Ilana Eldridge? She was widely referred to during the NT election campaign as being the leader of the Greens. Ambi 10:27, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
She was the lead candidate, which, if incumbent, would be referred to as Parliamentary Leader. We are limited here by the political party template, which does not allow for a 'convenor'. The convenor acts much like a political party's president, whereas the lead candidate only has their job during the campaign. --Zzymurgy 00:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
- But as far as I know, she's always been this since the creation of the party. If convenor is equivalent to party president, wouldn't then Eldridge be leader for the purposes of the template? Ambi 08:13, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
- It depends on what the party thinks, really. Eldridge may appear to be the leader through being the perennial candidate, but she would have to enter into a preselection process each time - unlike, say, the ALP, whose leader always holds office first. For most of the time, she's not in any formal position at all. I think it would be worth noting this on the page, in line with other states' Greens pages. I've added it now. --Zzymurgy 00:11, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks; that is much clearer. Would it be possible to do the same for the other states? Ambi 05:54, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- Good idea, although this will require a bit of local savvy in each state. Some state simply don't have a regular candidate as the face of the party. --Zzymurgy 03:18, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
This issue has arisen time and time again on Wikipedia with the various state party pages for the Greens. There is no comparison between Leader and Convenor. They have little in common, and Convenor is in no way a substitute for a Leader. In some states there are Leaders (Tasmania, Federal), and in others there is a single figure in Parliament or outside who stands out (WA, ACT, SA, Qld, NT). But it is misleading to say "instead opting for the term convenor". It indicates that it is simply an issue of vocabulary, rather than party structure. Braue 10:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)