Talk:First McGowan ministry

Australia: Western Australia / Politics Low‑importance

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

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was no consensus. Steelkamp (talk) 04:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging Second McGowan Ministry into First McGowan Ministry. All other consecutive ministries of the same premier are in a single article. This article can then be moved to its original title McGowan Ministry after the merge is complete. Steelkamp (talk) 08:38, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose so what's the fuss? look at other states and how they do it, before trying that here... in most case they separate the ministries... JarrahTree 10:21, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there is no consistency.

South Australia: You have to go as far back as First Waterhouse Ministry and Second Waterhouse Ministry to find ones that are separated.
New South Wales: They are all separated as far as I can tell.
Queensland: None are separated aside from First Palaszczuk Ministry, Second Palaszczuk Ministry and Third Palaszczuk Ministry.
Tasmania: Some are separated, some are not.
Victoria: Separated as far as I can tell.
Australian Capital Territory: Separated as far as I can tell.
Northern Territory: Not separated.

There is no national consistency, so surely state consistency would be better than nothing. There are larger problems here with naming as well, so I am going to go to WT:AUSPOL. Steelkamp (talk) 07:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well if you want to be a renaming hero (beware the echo chamber), go do it - but that does not convince me that the Mcgowan items need to be squashed.. I wasnt suggesting there was consistency - at least you can see the issue(s), state exceptionalism is a perennial problem in the oz project, but you start on this one, there are numerous similar cases in a wide range of topics. JarrahTree 10:11, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose As per JarrahTree. 2001:8003:9008:1301:E404:6E7B:19F7:BA0E (talk) 06:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian politics which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Second McGowan ministry into First McGowan ministry

Same as the first merger proposal, which ended in no consensus. All other consecutive ministries of the same premier are in a single article. This article can then be moved to McGowan ministry after the merge is complete. Steelkamp (talk) 11:14, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Separate articles may be warranted if discussing the the events of the term as premier and length is an issue, but when only tabulating the members, many of which are the same, two pages are unnecessary. Reywas92^Talk 15:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, the equivalent articles for most other states have separate articles per term First Howard ministry, Second Palaszczuk ministry etc, but then these articles are more mature than the WA ones which are pretty rubbish. Might address in the future. Pixiequin (talk) 10:34, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, there is not sufficient detail to really warrant two separate pages, these could easily be combined and the table of members/ministers could be cleaned up to reduce the size. Brock 1996 (talk) 06:25, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]