This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fiji This template is within the scope of WikiProject Fiji, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fiji 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.FijiWikipedia:WikiProject FijiTemplate:WikiProject FijiFiji articles Politics This template 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

To Number 57: if you want to remove the election links, please get consensus first. I don't remember seeing you around much in this department, while I've been working on it for 3 years and there are a number of others far more active on Fiji-related topics than you. Sure, it's "unnecessary." But it isn't doing any harm either. I disagree that it's redundant - as not all articles pertaining to Fiji politics contain the elections template. If others support your position, however, I'll concede. David Cannon 10:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree with Number 57's opinion on this, in fact, yeah... —Nightstallion (?) 14:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's not a Fiji articles issue, but more of a "Politics of..." template (a worldwide set) issue, as it is standard for these boxes to contain only the previous and next elections, rather than the full bunch. The Fijian template is probably the largest I've seen, which whilst not a bad thing, I think it does overdo it a bit. Thanks, Number 57 22:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, I see your point. I'm personally in favour of making them templates as exhaustive as possible, like a floating index, so to speak, in order to facilitate navigation by readers rather than writers of wikipedia. But I do see your point, so I'm not going to war over it. You may removed the dates if you wish. David Cannon 00:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]