Talk:1996 New Zealand general election

This article 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

New Zealand: Politics Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the New Zealand politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Registered parties with party lists

Note that the 2003 reference says that there were 21 party lists in 1996 (p22), but the 2007 reference says 22 not 21 (p87). I have taken the 2007 book as correct (particularly as the chapter is by David Henry the Chief Electoral officer. But the article Party lists in the New Zealand general election, 1996 lists 6 successful parties who mad it to Parliament plus 15 unsucessful parties, total 21 not 22 (?) Hugo999 (talk) 01:35, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In case you still have your actrix email address, you will have the relevant info in your inbox by now. What I've sent you are the official party lists. 670 people were put nominated on 21 lists. Schwede 66 03:02, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on New Zealand general election, 1996. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150710153411/http://www.legislation.co.nz/act/public/1993/0087/latest/whole.html to http://www.legislation.co.nz/act/public/1993/0087/latest/whole.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:05, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photos in 1996 New Zealand general election

I've reverted you photos changes. License on the old ones looks okay and they are a lot nicer. Could you explain the reason for your substitution? - SimonLyall (talk) 03:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

mostly cause they didnt fit time wise for 1996. like Anderton 2010 (+14 years) vs 2000 (+4 years), bolger 2008 (+12) vs 1996 (0), clarke 2005 (+9) vs 1997 (+1), Peters 2008 (+12) vs 1991 (-5). the prebble photo i just cropped cause it looks weird to have heads and then one full body photo. TheLoyalOrder (talk) 03:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

okay. It's a bit of a balance between the two requirements. Especially with limited numbers of photos available. I was prompted by this comment on twitter - SimonLyall (talk) 04:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok im not gonna change it, though i think maybe some compromise could be not the directly most recent photo but closer than the ones you reverted back to TheLoyalOrder (talk) 05:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

im going to copy this conversation over to the talk page for the article TheLoyalOrder (talk) 05:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Bottom of the infoboxes in MMP New Zealand elections

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list:

Politics, government, and law

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

Should the bottom of the infobox in this election and all elections that follow it, which use the mixed-member proportional system, show the Prime Minister and their party alone (similarly to other Westminster systems, such as the UK, Australia, and Canada), or the Cabinet and its member parties (similarly to other systems that have coalition governments, such as Germany, the Netherlands, and Poland)? Glide08 (talk) 13:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand uses the same electoral system as countries like Germany and Poland, but its politics is very different. Judging it the same is erroneous as is making up naming conventions for governments that don't exist like "Bolger II" and "Bolger III". New Zealand's naming conventions are done by party both before and after MMP. Kiwichris (talk) 00:14, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the answer is rather than have to choose between PM and government, we should have three parameters at the bottom of the infobox: One for the Prime Minister, one for their party and one for their government? It might make sense to move the 'outgoing/elected members' parameter to the same group too so all the links to outgoing/incoming are in the same place. Number 5 7 19:34, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be inclined to do something more akin to the European examples, or maybe a combination of the two? Like, list the PM, but then the coalition below it? Cabinet ministers change mid-government reasonably frequently but solely listing the PM's party is misstating it a bit. If we look at the 2020 New Zealand general election for example, you'd think that the government stayed the same as it shows Jacinda Ardern of Labour as PM before and after - but of course, this ignores that the govt beforehand relied on support from NZ First and Labour, while the govt after was a Labour majority. Turnagra (talk) 22:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe something like

Government before election	Government after election
6th Labour (PM Jacinda Ardern)	6th Labour (PM Jacinda Ardern)
Labour–NZFirst (+ Green)	Labour

TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:52, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i'll add that the status quo is fine TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:54, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]