Talk:Internet Party (New Zealand)

Untitled

https://twitter.com/InternetPartyNZ/statuses/451827790690918400 Ummm.... not sure encouraging your party members to edit your Wikipedia page is appropriate! 103.14.140.76 (talk) 09:05, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Party metadata

This New Zealand article has some associated metadata templates to display political party colours and names in election candidate and results tables.

The table below shows the content of these metadata templates.

Internet Party (New Zealand) — political party metadata
Color		Shortname
	#662C92	Internet

Capitalisation of "Mana"

While the Mana Movement prefers to capitalise its name, i.e, "MANA Movement", "Mana" is not an acronym. Per WP:TRADEMARK, Wikipedia does not follow corporate or organisational preferences in capitalisation -- we use standard English capitalisation. the organisation's preference is indicated in the lead paragraph. The issue was discussed at length at Talk:Internet Party and Mana Movement, and after a proposal to move the article, the debate was resolved in favour of "Mana" instead of "MANA" per Wikipedia policy over the party's preference or any "official" designation. Ground Zero | t 19:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Political position

Given the political background of the founder, and the party's alliance with Mana, shouldn't the Internet Party be described as far left?Royalcourtier (talk) 06:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Kim Dotcom helped fund Banks for the Auckland mayoralty. How does this make him far left?-gadfium 07:34, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

He funded a lot of other causes too. What is important is the party policies, his politics, and the politics of those who joined the party. They are uniformly far left - Mana Party, Laila Harre, Socialist Aotearoa, etc.Royalcourtier (talk) 06:48, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

The policies listed in the article do not seem to be "far left" (to me at least). The fact that they formed an alliance with Mana doesn't mean that they adopted all of those policies. Mattlore (talk) 07:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Internet Party (New Zealand). 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/20150802224646/http://www.elections.org.nz/parties-candidates/registered-political-parties/register-political-parties to http://www.elections.org.nz/parties-candidates/registered-political-parties/register-political-parties
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9113113/Kim-Dotcom-to-enter-politics
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150113200001/https://internet.org.nz/policies to https://internet.org.nz/policies

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) 03:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Internet Party (New Zealand). 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/20140327220944/https://internet.org.nz/mission to https://internet.org.nz/mission

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) 13:24, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Party no longer active

I consider this party is no longer active. While the party has not made any announcement that it is over (which is common for minor parties that drift away), the party:

• is unregistered and has been for over two years;
• did not participate in the 2019 local elections;
• is not running candidates of any sort in the 2020 general election;
• has no website;
• has no leader;
• has not appeared in any of the following media since 2017:
  • Stuff;
  • RNZ; and
  • NZ Herald.

I've also marked the change to 'inactive' on List of political parties in New Zealand, Template:New Zealand political parties, and Template:Historic New Zealand political parties. If you consider that the party should still be described as active, please discuss it here. HenryCrun15 (talk) 04:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

HenryCrun15, I propose we revert back to using the present tense as per what is written on the page the party appeared to have applied for broadcasting funding as recently as this year (2020), indicating it is likely active in some capacity. Helper201 (talk) 14:01, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I see your point and I agree. I've made the article desribe the party as still existing, but I have emphasised the party's lack of action (no leader, no website, not contesting 2020 election). I will also amend the templates and lists. It's my opinion that if the party doesn't do something within a year of the broadcasting applications – appear in some media, announce a leader, etc – then it should be considered inactive. HenryCrun15 (talk) 20:37, 1 October 2020 (UTC)