This article iswritten inAustralian English, which has its own spelling conventions (centre,realise,program,labour (butLabor Party)) and some terms may be different or absent from othervarieties of English. According to therelevant style guide, this should not be changed withoutbroad consensus.
While thebiographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced orpoorly sourced contentious material about living personsmust be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please seethis noticeboard.
Pauline Hanson's One Nation is within the scope ofWikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage ofAustralia andAustralia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit theproject page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofpolitics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofconservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This article has beenautomatically rated by abot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the|auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofwomen on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
The party has been renamed as per November 2025 - from Pauline herself and evidently as described in the rest of this article. Shouldn't the page name be changed to reflect this? Either just "One Nation" which seems to be the most common name or "One Nation Party"Shrubshire (talk)07:30, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that around where I live the most common name is One Notion, but I don't live among Hanson supporters. PHON is commonly used in print. Rarely One Nation alone. But our personal experiences don't count for much. Whatreliable sources say matters the most.HiLo48 (talk)07:56, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ITBF the party changed from "Pauline Hanson's One Nation" to "One Nation". Seehere for an announcement. I was thinking about this being a likely possibility today after the defection of a high profile politician,Barnaby Joyce from the National Party to One Nation. Hanson is getting on in years and I'd suspect she's thinking about her legacy and the future of the party without her.
Probably best to wait to see this reflected in reporting in news media because if we're going to rename this then I'd think it might be something that affects theOne Nation disamb page given it is potentially the PTOPIC.TarnishedPathtalk10:53, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the confirmation. It's slightly tricky because how do you distinguishPauline Hanson's One Nation from Pauline Hanson'sOne Nation in prose? Certainly in headlines "One Nation" would have to be the common name already. I'm a little bit on the fence with regard to One Nation being the primary topic –one-nation conservatism has historically gotten similar page views and has equal or greater claims to historical significance, but I'm not sure there's actually much likelihood of confusion.ITBF📢13:01, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the only WP:RS that matters is theAEC website. Once the party name has changed with the AEC, it should be reflected here; how it is referred to in the media is irrelevant. The ON website mostly refers to itself as ON but still uses PHON in their registered address and party logo for legal reasons, so the name has not officially changed yet, despite the announcement.Maranello10 (talk)04:42, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why? If it officially becomes the name, what would be the basis for continuing to call it PHON at that point? The media reporting would likely coalesce anyway from PHON to ON (moreso) once it happens. The only question would be, as you mentioned, whether it becomes the PTOPIC and affects the disamb page or gets changed to "One Nation (Australia)".Maranello10 (talk)14:06, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Because we name things how we expect people to find them. So if for example the media kept on referring the party has PHON, for whatever reason, we could probably expect people to keep searching for that.TarnishedPathtalk14:12, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The media uses both names, and increasingly One Nation. A quick, unscientific search provides articles from this week published by theABC andThe Guardian Australia, which used "One Nation" exclusively in their titles and content. I still see PHON used when it comes to polling articles, such as this Australian article reporting on this week's Newspoll inThe Australian, as it is still officially their name. I would expect this to change too if the party name changes officially with the AEC. If the argument is to use the name that is in the wider lexicon, I would argue that "One Nation" is already ahead. However, I think it is a moot point until if and when the name is changed with the AEC. At that point, I fail to see how using the official name, which is also being used in the media and by the party itself, is controversial.Maranello10 (talk)17:44, 21 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Mhaot, I have notice that you have provided contentious categories (Category:Anti-black racism in Australia & Category:Anti-indigenous racism in Australia) to this article it is to best avoid this unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution. Please provided sources to such claims or remove the categories. SeeMOS:LABEL andWP:NPOV.~2026-58078-1 (talk)06:08, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Where it says the party's political spectrum affiliation is wrong
One Nation is moderate right at most, I'd say they're centre-right to right wing. They're absolutely not far right, it's genuinely laughable as far as I'm concerned lol.~2026-96102-1 (talk)12:37, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Before I make a big change, I'd like to raise it here. The party's history section has become significantly bloated and unfocused in its writing since 2016, making it unencylopedic and difficult to read.
As a part of the tidy-up, I'd suggest that the PHON state branch histories and electoral results be moved to their own separate pages. The main article would be primarily focused on the Federal government branch, similar to the pages for theAustralian Greens andNational Party of Australia (e.g.New South Wales National Party).
.svg)
.svg){kind=logo}
