Template talk:Infobox Election Campaign

message: * Moved discussion from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian politics. Joestella 10:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't mind if the page names are changed. As for the 3RR rule, it takes two to tango (or in this case revert) to which I feel I am on the stronger footing. The Major Party Leader table is used for state and federal elections and has been for quite some time now. By placing a table of lower house stats, you're simply reproducing redundant data further down the page. I notice that you uploaded the picture of Debnam "something smells rotten" yet you feel you must take Iemma off the page. The MPL table is the standard used in WikiProject Australian Politics to clearly show the leaders of the major parties, whom are often crucial to deciding which party obtains government. I notice your Debnam picture has, at best, a pretty light fair use rationale, as opposed to the Iemma and Debnam rationales. There have been no direct wishes for them to be removed, aside from a few aesthetic comments, which I had also provided to you as a means of consensus a solution but this also does not rest with you. Aesthetics is no longer the issue, you simply do not believe that either realistic premier after the election or his contender should be featured. I am simply maintaining the status quo, rather than allowing a redundant table to be placed there instead which is simply pointless. Timeshift 15:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Timeshift, if you wish to discuss the leaders table, instead of claiming that it is some sort of standard for this WikiProject, why don't you join the discussion about it in the section above, where you will see quite a few different views on the issue. Please also try to stick to constructive discussion, rather than personal comments about Joestella. He hasn't actually broken the 3RR, and you have, so you have no "stronger footing" - let's jsut leave the edit warring and discuss it properly. To get back to the issue in this section, I don't object to the proposed renaming. 16:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly you might wish to sign your name correctly with four tilde symbols. Secondly I have participated in the above discussion, the NSW 2006 election discussion, and his and my talk pages in length. He is pushing for a change from the status quo for the MPL tables used on all Australian elections so the onus is on him to show there is support for his changes which there is not. I've provided solutions (such as a solution) for the only issues raised, being aesthetics, which has been addressed through the solution, but he insists on showing redundant information. I do not see anyone agreeing that the MPL tables should be removed, so until there is support he should maintain the status quo. Timeshift 16:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Back to the infoboxes... 

message: What is the consistency problem behind this revert? The image, at least in its present position, enlargens the template un-necessarily.--cj | talk 13:32, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding bulk

message: Why is this being used in favour of the more widely-used Template:Infobox election?
This leads to inconsistency between articles such as Australian federal election, 2010 and Next Australian federal election which use different templates despite being in the same chronology and linking to one another from their respective infoboxes.  The infoboxes on both should be in the same format, IMHO.
Also, as the Template:Infobox election template is more widely used, more articles can benefit when improvements are made.  By splitting off into a separate template, the articles that use it will not benefit from changes to the other.
Moreover, the Template:Infobox Election Campaign infobox is just ugly with its garish format (to my eyes).  The other one is much neater, IMHO.  —sroc (talk) 03:04, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does this template exist?