Talk:Premier of Victoria

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Premier of Victoria article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Premier of Victoria is currently a Politics and government good article nominee. Nominated by GMH Melbourne (talk) at 04:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

An editor has placed this article on hold to allow improvements to be made to satisfy the good article criteria. Recommendations have been left on the review page, and editors have seven days to address these issues. Improvements made in this period will influence the reviewer's decision whether or not to list the article as a good article.

Short description: Head of government in the state of Victoria

Australia: Victoria / Politics Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Premier of Victoria 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Victoria.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Premier of Victoria appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 October 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that premiers of Victoria get a bronze statue (example pictured) if they hold office for more than 3,000 days?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2023/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Premier of Victoria.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of List of premiers of Victoria was copied or moved into Premier of Victoria with this edit on 9 October 2023. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Useful Links– History Section

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet talk 10:04, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Statue of Sir Rupert Hamer, former Victorian Premier

... that Premiers of Victoria get a bronze statue (example pictured) if they hold the office for more than 3,000 days? Source: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/19/a-bronze-north-face-jacket-daniel-andrews-sized-up-for-statue-after-3000-days-as-premier
- Reviewed:

Moved to mainspace by GMH Melbourne (talk). Self-nominated at 13:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Premier of Victoria; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

The article is new enough and long enough. QPQ doesn't yet apply to the nominator. The hook is cited with a citation from the article and interesting. No issues with image, perhaps link Rupert Hamer in the caption? The article is broadly of a decent quality but earwig noted a lot of overlap with this page which I would advise the nominator to look at. More detail can be seen here. Llewee (talk) 22:11, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Llewee: The text that is in the Governor's Website is Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. The Attribution can be found at the top of the Reference list section ––– GMH MELBOURNE 00:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, apologies, I did not see that. No problems then. Llewee (talk) 06:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unilateral move

A recent discussion on separating the list of premiers of Victoria from this article ended in a consensus not to move. It appears the original submitter has unilaterally ignored this and created a separate article for the list anyway. Victoria is now inconsistent with all the other articles on premiers/CMs. I was a soft oppose in the move request, prepared to reconsider if the articles (emphasis on articles, plural) became too long and unwieldy. Most importantly, there needs to be consistency across all articles for state/territory heads of government. The fact the consensus has been immediately defied means that I would like to request the list be immediately restored to this article and a new discussion opened about whether to split all the lists of premiers/CMs. Axver (talk) 09:41, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - list should be returned Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 09:48, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - five out of the nine users who contributed to the move discussion were in favour of the breaking out of a perpetually growing list. I chose to be bold, expand the article, and break out the list to List of premiers of Victoria. I suggest initiating a merge discussion about moving the list back in. ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 22:40, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"I chose to be bold" ???

The consensus was for now, no move - 7 users said oppose pretty clearly Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 23:15, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
five out of the nine users who contributed to the move discussion were in favour of the breaking out of a perpetually growing list. ––– GMH Melbourne (talk) 00:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - a request has been made to restore the article name. The move was clearly against the consensus. Nibraa (talk) 02:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting proposal

See here for discussion: Talk:List of premiers of Victoria#Splitting proposal GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Cabinet

Hi GMH Melbourne, I noticed you have nominated this article for GA. I just remembered a suggestion I was going to make ages ago... In the infobox there is a link to National Cabinet. This is the only mention in the article. As it is a rather important function of the premier can I suggest adding something explaining their representation on the forum, perhaps in the 'Powers and role' section? JennyOz (talk) 04:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I will make the addition. GMH Melbourne (talk) 06:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:54, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Premier of Victoria/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: GMH Melbourne (talk · contribs) 04:59, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: SSSB (talk · contribs) 19:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this review on, before we reach 250 days in the queue. SSSB (talk) 19:52, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Comments

Earwig's copyright checker detects no issues. SSSB (talk) 20:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No issues with images. SSSB (talk) 20:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article is stable. SSSB (talk) 20:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having to assume good faith on source 13. I can see the byline of the article, which makes me fairly confident it is WP:OR compliant. i.e. it specifically discusses a minority government in Victoria. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements necessary for promotion

Rupert Hamer should be wikilinked in the caption for his statue. SSSB (talk) 20:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done

In the opening sentence, you've put premier of Victoria, with a lowercase p. But in the second sentence, Cabinet of Victoria gets an uppercase. This looks odd, if nothing else. Can I suggest that when we have the title "Premier of Victoria", we capitilise Premier? Likewise with Goverenor of Victoria. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the current format is correct under WP:JOBTITLES as "premier of Victoria" refers to the office of the premier rather than one person imparticlar and "Cabinet of Victoria" refers to a body/organisation (similar to Parliament of Victoria). GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a look at the articles of other states, and nations, and I am not going to argue this point here as it is done this way across all articles. SSSB (talk) 07:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The description of how the premier is appointed isn't great. Its chucky and hard to follow. I would ditch ",meaning the support of a majority of Legislative Assembly members." The concept of commanding confidence is quite common. And for those who don't know what this means, there is a wikilink. The following sentence should start "The premier", instead of "this". SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done reworded

Per WP:CITELEAD, we don't need citations in the lead, as these statements should be cited within the article body. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done

"Six premiers have ...." this paragraph needs {{as of}} at the begining. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done

"The longest-serving premier was ..." should be present tense, as the office still exists. Likewise the following sentence. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done

"when its constitution" should be "when the constitution"

Done

"Victoria's first election re-elected Haines," no it didn't. Because the premier isn't directly elected. It needs to be something like "Victoria's first election allowed Haines to retain the premiership" The second half of this sentence will need rewording accordingly. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done reworded

"Between 2014 and 2023 ..." no need for this to be its own parapgraph. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"serve as premier for 17 years and 83 days." it should be specified why this is significant (longest serving premier to date). SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done

"Cain resigned from the office of premier in 1990" the source immediatly after this statement discusses the resignation of Thompson. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done changed source

I don't understand what source 17 is trying to tell me. Can we please have a secondary source for the premier's exuctive powers? At best the current source is WP:OR. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done couldn't find any other source so I removed the sentence.

Source 18 (First interim report) should direct you to page 107, not 182. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done

It should be staated, and sourced, that the premier was previously part of the Council of Australian Governments, before the national cabinet was founded. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done also added supporting citation.

I don't think we need a breakdown of what the national cabinet is. But if this stays it needs rewording. The national cabinet does not exist to "to coordinate national priorities with the premier of Victoria". It exists to coordinate national priorities with the governments of all the states, of which Victoria is one. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done removed explanation

Can we get a secondary source for this please? "Changes to the premier's salary are determined by the Victorian Independent Remuneration Tribunal". Because the current source does not say this. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done added source

The history section feels incomplete. We talk about difficulty in finding a consistent premeier between 1855 and 1863. And then jump to changes in government from 1901 until the 1950s. Can we try to fill this gap please. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other suggestions

"The shortest-serving premier was George Elmslie, also the first premier from the Labor Party, who served for 13 days." I would ditch "also the". SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Done
The history section isn't long enough to justify sub headings for pre and post federalisation. If these are kept it needs to be Post federalisation, not post federalism. Federalism is still ongoing in Australia. SSSB (talk) 18:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Elections are held every four years, on ..." no need for this to be its own paragragh. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Done
"Premiers who hold the office for 3,000 days ..." in brackets can we have a breakdown of how many years and months this is? To avoid readers having to do some mental maths. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Done

Final comments

There are a few things that need adressing. But nothing to major. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SSSB: Thank you so much for your suggestions, I have addressed most of the above issues in this edit. I have made a few questions/comments above in bold underneath the corresponding dot point. RE the history section, I will hopefully get that completed within the next couple of day and ping you when ready. GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]