Talk:Civil Unions Act 2006
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Ikzing in topic Requested move
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
Civil partnerships edit
Civil partnerships will commence under the Civil Partnership Act 2008 (ACT) (commences 15/11/2008) [1]-— Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.57.62 (talk) 04:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Requested move edit
Since the civil union legislation did not go through, and since there is now new legislation recognising same sex couples, I would like to suggest that this article is renamed as 'Domestic Partnership in the ACT' (Similar to the TAS article) or 'Civil Partnership in the ACT'. It seems like this would be more appropriate and consistent with all the other LGBT pages. Ikzing (talk) 00:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- This is an article about a specific piece of legislation which was introduced and subsequently overturned. It was a very high-profile battle, and there's more than enough room for a very good article about it. I would not object to a broader article as well; however, there is no such concept as "domestic partnership" here in the ACT, so that particular title doesn't make any sense. Rebecca (talk) 04:04, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- My point was not about the exact title, it was about being able to add more to the page. Perhaps "Recognition of same-sex unions in the ACT" then? This page has been a stub for years, so I don't see any harm in moving all the ACT's multiple battles onto a single page. Otherwise I will just have to create a new one which will duplicate this information anyway. If this page was chock full of details, I would understand. Ikzing (talk) 04:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Re-write edit
This whole page should be re-written. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.130.123 (talk) 14:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)