Template talk:New South Wales elections

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Elections and Referendums This template is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles Australia: New South Wales / Politics New South Wales elections is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles This template is supported by WikiProject New South Wales. This template is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.

I am looking to improve navigation to the results and candidates pages, eg Results 2019 and candidates 2019, which are presently only linked via a hatnote in the relevant section. I am thinking of including a navbox on each page & that it might be best to include them in two additional sections in this navobox. I don't have a firm view and am happy to be persuaded otherwise. Find bruce (talk) 01:01, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The colonial and state elections were recently combined into a single section. These had previously been separated since before the colonial election articles were created. In my view, the template looks quite disorganised with them all lumped into one section. Federation forms a natural political break (change in government scope, change in political parties). The positioning of the by-elections below the rest of the template is a positive change that I'd favour keeping. -DilatoryRevolution (talk) 01:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I generally agree. The only thing that makes me pause is the proposal to deploy Vector (2022). If they maintain the fixed width, it will force a line break at 1894 - see this preview of the template with Vector (2022) which means the previous break at 1898 will become quite clunky. Find bruce (talk) 03:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to re-open this discussion after Vector is deployed and retain the separation for now. -DilatoryRevolution (talk) 02:48, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57: Find bruce (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delayed response, been away for a few days. I can't see the point in separating the general election row into pre- and post-independence; it isn't widely done for election templates like this. Number 57 13:50, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. Please keep in mind that no precedent is ever set by any template for any other. In this situation, the point of the separation is outlined above in my first point. --DilatoryRevolution (talk) 02:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, please keep in mind that the 1901 break does not reflect independence. For further information on what occured, see Federation of Australia. --DilatoryRevolution (talk) 02:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]