Talk:Liberal Party of Australia
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Liberal Party of Australia article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3|
|This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)), and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on August 31, 2013 and August 31, 2015.|
|This talk page is automatically archived by lowercase sigmabot III. Any threads with no replies in 2 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
Daily page views
Ideology label in this article infobox but not the ALP infobox? Can we remove it?
Can I ask why we have a ridiculous highly contentious much disputed political ideology label in the infobox of the Liberal Party article and then nothing in the Opposition ALP article's infobox? I propose removing this ideology label from this article altogether and avoid endless dispute between editors as has happended again in the thread under the Heading Re-open consensus on ideology. This would also then provide consistency between our articles on Australia's two major political parties. Any opposition to this plan and reasons why or would a removal be okay? Merphee (talk) 02:47, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
- Sigh. Yes please. If there was a way to salt that field, I'd support that too. Frickeg (talk) 03:08, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
Infobox is too fat
There is way too much width on that infobox, it hogs up the page, especially when you resize the browser window. I'm not sure what is causing it, if it is a template issue or the inputs are causing it. Nonetheless, adding this here, so others may be alerted. SchizoidNightmares (talk) 22:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- This was caused by a long non-wrapped wiki link. I have shortened the link, and have reduced the width significantly as a result. SchizoidNightmares (talk) 22:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Michael Wooldridge as deputy leader was never Shadow Treasurer
At the Michael Wooldridge article I added the fact that as Deputy Leader he did not request to become Shadow Treasurer, making him one of a few and to date, the last deputy Liberal leader who never held the Treasury portfolio either in government not in opposition.
However this has been reverted by MaterialScientist on the basis of original research.
I believe that fact about Wooldridge should be included and to emphasise that most of the time the deputy Liberal leadership and the Treasury portfolio have gone together.
Currently described as centre-right to right-wing. This may be a misnomer and I would suggest making it simply centre-right. The comparable left-of-centre Labor Party's article describes it as centre-left. As for the source provided, a somewhat obscure one when plenty of articles can be found on the subject matter, I can't find an instance of it describing the LP as right-wing. Cheers, thorpewilliam (talk) 06:45, 9 December 2020 (UTC)