Talk:Australian Labor Students

message: why has this entry been proposed for deletion but not other factions of NUS? Michellecrisp 00:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: If you want the article to be safe from deletion, then I urge you to locate multiple independent secondary sources.  --SmokeyJoe 01:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It just survived an AfD. Accordingly, if it is nominated again, I will be pushing for a speedy keep for disruption. ("I didn't get my way this time, maybe if I do the same thing again tomorrow I might"). Rebecca 03:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, I've looked and I can't find any; as far as I can see this article fails WP:V and WP:N. There are no RS on Google here and little on Google archives here. Certainly, there is nothing to underpin 99% of the content. This is why I suggested a merge was the best solution but Rebecca is insisting on a separate article and undoes my merges. TerriersFan 02:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is more to sourcing than a Google search, and this is not where those of us who argued to keep the article got our sources. What you're failing to recognise is that you are not charged with deciding what is in your opinion the best outcome for the article - you're charged with interpreting the consensus that is there. Moreover, the merged version of National Union of Students looked absolutely ridiculous - the content didn't fit there at all. Rebecca 03:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine, but we have moved on from the AfD to discussing how best to deal with the article - will you please cite those sources or suggest a less 'absolutely ridiculous' merge target? TerriersFan 15:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no sensible merge topic. It is a standalone topic, and the result would look as downright silly and random as it did in the NUS article were it merged anywhere else. I'm currently working on the rather more important goal of trying to make sure we have good, referenced articles on every sitting member of an Australian parliament, so this sort of thing is rather low on my agenda. Should you feel the desire to, however, you're entirely welcome to go to the library and reference the article yourself. I somewhat doubt you will, however, because you seem to think directing the work of other people is more fun. Rebecca 01:11, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disposition of this article 

message: Do people think it's more precise to classify the ALP as social democratic, rather than center-left. By the same token do people think it's more precise to classify the Coalition as neoliberal, rather than center-right. If anyone has any input into this please see the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Australian_federal_election%2C_2007#Description_of_ALP.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alans1977 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ALP and Coalition ideology 

message: The article needs to be improved comprehensively with references and citations to establish notability. In particular, significant independent coverage is needed to verify the information in the article - all of it currently appears to be original research.
Australian Matt (talk) 10:36, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability & citations