Talk:Premier of Victoria/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

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]