This article was nominated for deletion on September 7, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is totally wrong, surely? John McDonnell (or whatever he's called) didn't stand in the election, because he wasn't nominated. It's therefore wrong to list him as a nominated candidate with the picture box thing in the top right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 13th Law Lord ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I am currently working to find citations for all possible and confirmed candidates. Seivad 15:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Please do not prod this article, if you believe it should be deleted then create a proper AfD debate so it can be discussed.
As I have said before, the coverage of this election does not violate WP:CB in my opinion, as in concentrates on current facts, and is actually happening at the moment, it is vital that this is covered on Wikipedia. Seivad 11:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, not happy, but I'll stick by the consensus of the deletion process which was to keep this article. The article smacks of putting together a host of predictions and crystal-balling and calling the mush of sourced quotations "an article", but that view is obviously not carried by those who voted.
If I can contribute to this article in time, of course I will do my best. doktorb words deeds 22:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I suppose there must have been a change in policy when I wasn’t looking. — Ian Spackman 21:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
It is going outside the scope of an article on the leadership to start speculating in it on who the next Chancellor of the Exchequer might be, in fact the Chancellor of the Exchequer article would be a more appropriate one to include such an article, it is important to bare in mind though that as recently as Stanley Baldwin a Prime Minister has also served also at one point as Chancellor of the Exchequer, during the war Winston Churchill also handled major departmental briefs, the Prime Minister is actually First Lord of the Treasury and Minister for the Civil Service by tradition and subject to royal approval can handle any departmental brief, although improbable it would be quite possible for Gordon Brown to ask the Queen to allow him to continue as Chancellor of the Exchequer and be Prime Minister simultaneously or be Prime Minister and Home Secretary.-- Lord of the Isles 23:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
This has been reported to be the date when Blair resigns. However, it is really only speculation, so should anything be added about it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.29.213.174 ( talk) 19:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC).
I've tried to keep my corrections to the strictly factual, and I'm glad that most of them have stuck, e.g. the odd suggestions in the original that Gordon was considering not standing. I am still highly sceptical that Tony Blair will endorse anyone until the selection has occurred, but we'll see. However, I'm keen to insist on keeping Clarke as a potential rather than an actual candidate. I know him personally and this is a fact. Moreover, the citation in the piece refers to an article where he says he's not going to stand (which is also too definite IMO).
NickPalmerMPNick Palmer NickPalmerMP 08:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by NickPalmerMP ( talk • contribs) 08:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
The anonymous user 85.210.250.204 has added the phrase 'The scandal of Brown's role in the destruction of millions of pensions in the UK has done serious damage to his candidacy'. I do not think this is NPOV - as it is a very over-simplified way of referring to the recent fuss over the 1997 decision to reduce tax exemptions for pension funds. As such, I am removing it
Vino s 12:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps this should become a seperate article and include events relating to the Deputy Leadership candidates and suggested candidates and be linked also to that other article? -- Lord of the Isles 18:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I've deleted the blank results table twice now, on the basis that we do not yet have enough declared candidacies to confirm that there will be an election. The <! --> note included even said that the table "assume[d]" that McDonnell and Brown would get sufficient support - but this lays down why it is not appropriate to include this ("Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.") WP is not a news site, tempting as it is to think it is. Peeper 12:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Given that Gordon Brown's only declared challenger, John McDonnell, has not yet received the sufficient number of nominations to be an official candidate, what would happen to this article if there was in fact no election at all in a few days' time when nominations close? Surely the article would need to be renamed at the very least. Dovea 18:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Is there a list of the MPs who nominated McDonnell anywhere?
Do we still really need a comprehensive list of who declined to stand and when? Given that nominations are now closed, it is completely trivial to mention that people who are not standing are not standing. It is my feeling that this section can be completely removed, or shortened to a sentence like "All other people mentioned by the media as potential candidates eventually declined to stand." in one of the other sections, maybe mentioning that there was a lot of ballyhoo about Miliband or Reid in particular. Though obviously I am not going to remove it unilaterally, I definitely think that the article can be massively slimmed down now, hopefully to make way for the bits of that bloody timeline that make up the majority of what this article should hold to be merged back in. Any thoughts? Jdcooper 01:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Just a note to say I've added this page to Labour Party leadership election, 2007 because of the leadership election which took plage in Israel's Labor Party during the same year. There's also a redirect at Labor Party leadership election, 2007 to take into account the different spellings. Cheers TheRetroGuy ( talk) 14:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Labour Party (UK) leadership election, 2007. 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:
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:36, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Labour Party (UK) leadership election, 2007. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=700982007When 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on September 7, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is totally wrong, surely? John McDonnell (or whatever he's called) didn't stand in the election, because he wasn't nominated. It's therefore wrong to list him as a nominated candidate with the picture box thing in the top right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 13th Law Lord ( talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I am currently working to find citations for all possible and confirmed candidates. Seivad 15:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Please do not prod this article, if you believe it should be deleted then create a proper AfD debate so it can be discussed.
As I have said before, the coverage of this election does not violate WP:CB in my opinion, as in concentrates on current facts, and is actually happening at the moment, it is vital that this is covered on Wikipedia. Seivad 11:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, not happy, but I'll stick by the consensus of the deletion process which was to keep this article. The article smacks of putting together a host of predictions and crystal-balling and calling the mush of sourced quotations "an article", but that view is obviously not carried by those who voted.
If I can contribute to this article in time, of course I will do my best. doktorb words deeds 22:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I suppose there must have been a change in policy when I wasn’t looking. — Ian Spackman 21:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
It is going outside the scope of an article on the leadership to start speculating in it on who the next Chancellor of the Exchequer might be, in fact the Chancellor of the Exchequer article would be a more appropriate one to include such an article, it is important to bare in mind though that as recently as Stanley Baldwin a Prime Minister has also served also at one point as Chancellor of the Exchequer, during the war Winston Churchill also handled major departmental briefs, the Prime Minister is actually First Lord of the Treasury and Minister for the Civil Service by tradition and subject to royal approval can handle any departmental brief, although improbable it would be quite possible for Gordon Brown to ask the Queen to allow him to continue as Chancellor of the Exchequer and be Prime Minister simultaneously or be Prime Minister and Home Secretary.-- Lord of the Isles 23:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
This has been reported to be the date when Blair resigns. However, it is really only speculation, so should anything be added about it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.29.213.174 ( talk) 19:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC).
I've tried to keep my corrections to the strictly factual, and I'm glad that most of them have stuck, e.g. the odd suggestions in the original that Gordon was considering not standing. I am still highly sceptical that Tony Blair will endorse anyone until the selection has occurred, but we'll see. However, I'm keen to insist on keeping Clarke as a potential rather than an actual candidate. I know him personally and this is a fact. Moreover, the citation in the piece refers to an article where he says he's not going to stand (which is also too definite IMO).
NickPalmerMPNick Palmer NickPalmerMP 08:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by NickPalmerMP ( talk • contribs) 08:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
The anonymous user 85.210.250.204 has added the phrase 'The scandal of Brown's role in the destruction of millions of pensions in the UK has done serious damage to his candidacy'. I do not think this is NPOV - as it is a very over-simplified way of referring to the recent fuss over the 1997 decision to reduce tax exemptions for pension funds. As such, I am removing it
Vino s 12:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps this should become a seperate article and include events relating to the Deputy Leadership candidates and suggested candidates and be linked also to that other article? -- Lord of the Isles 18:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
I've deleted the blank results table twice now, on the basis that we do not yet have enough declared candidacies to confirm that there will be an election. The <! --> note included even said that the table "assume[d]" that McDonnell and Brown would get sufficient support - but this lays down why it is not appropriate to include this ("Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place.") WP is not a news site, tempting as it is to think it is. Peeper 12:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Given that Gordon Brown's only declared challenger, John McDonnell, has not yet received the sufficient number of nominations to be an official candidate, what would happen to this article if there was in fact no election at all in a few days' time when nominations close? Surely the article would need to be renamed at the very least. Dovea 18:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Is there a list of the MPs who nominated McDonnell anywhere?
Do we still really need a comprehensive list of who declined to stand and when? Given that nominations are now closed, it is completely trivial to mention that people who are not standing are not standing. It is my feeling that this section can be completely removed, or shortened to a sentence like "All other people mentioned by the media as potential candidates eventually declined to stand." in one of the other sections, maybe mentioning that there was a lot of ballyhoo about Miliband or Reid in particular. Though obviously I am not going to remove it unilaterally, I definitely think that the article can be massively slimmed down now, hopefully to make way for the bits of that bloody timeline that make up the majority of what this article should hold to be merged back in. Any thoughts? Jdcooper 01:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Just a note to say I've added this page to Labour Party leadership election, 2007 because of the leadership election which took plage in Israel's Labor Party during the same year. There's also a redirect at Labor Party leadership election, 2007 to take into account the different spellings. Cheers TheRetroGuy ( talk) 14:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Labour Party (UK) leadership election, 2007. 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:
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:36, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Labour Party (UK) leadership election, 2007. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=700982007When 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)