This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I appreciate this effort to make an endorsement page, but we should probably wait until we have a full list of candidates that people can endorse. 2 endorsements is not enough to justify making a page. If you can find more endorsements, it will be fine, but otherwise wait.
KingWither (
talk)
I think that the list has grown to the point where it is legitimate. Best to have it now and add to it as the election continues. --
Brendanww2 (
talk) 21:25, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
If someone endorses a party as a whole but also campaigns for a specific candidate or candidates from that party, should that be listed in both sections or just in the Party endorsement section? -- Brendanww2 ( talk) 21:29, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
@ EddieHugh: removed several endorsements from the list. One because it was from the Daily Mail (fair enough); Trump because the source wasn't good enough (there are [ https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/10/why-labour-welcomes-donald-trumps-endorsement-boris-johnson others); Grist because the endorsement wasn't unambiguous enough (which is a fair point, though I think it's pretty unambiguous); and then several because they endorsed more than one party.
I think an explicit endorsement of more than one party is fine and worth including, as they were in the 2017 equivalent article. I don't think "vote tactically against [The Conservatives, Labour, etc]" is worth including unless it's from a print newspaper or magazine. But naming two specific parties seems fine to me. Interested to hear other editors' thoughts. Ralbegen ( talk) 15:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
"No doubt, the usual Leftie luvvies will come out for Jeremy Corbyn during the General Election campaign.
But Boris Johnson can count on the support of celebrated art duo Gilbert & George.
Gilbert Prousch says Boris would sometimes shout: 'Gilbert! George!' as he rode past them on his bicycle in London.
He tells me: 'That's more than enough for us. We know whose side he's on. People are trying to bring him down with all this 'liar, liar' stuff. It's quite appalling.'
The pair are also fans of Cabinet minister Michael Gove: 'He's brilliant,' says Gilbert, who gives Corbyn short shrift.
'Can you imagine if it was he who decided what art is? It would be all Nicaraguan posters.'"
More United has published a list of 34 endorsements. [1] In some constituencies (such as Ceredigion), they've endorsed two candidates who are standing against each other. They state in their criteria for endorsement: "Where there are two or more qualifying candidates in a constituency that seeks More United support, we may endorse both without providing financial support, subject to a members' vote." [2] I've included these cases in the article for now with "also endorsed" notes, but would it be better to omit them? EmphasisMine ( talk) 21:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Tony Blair is listed as endorsing Gordon Nardell, Labour candidate for the two cities. I don't think that it's worth including any endorsement from a politician for any candidate of the same party as them, and think that Blair shouldn't be listed as an endorser for any Labour candidate. Ralbegen ( talk) 18:30, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I've boldly included Emily Benn's endorsements of Labour candidates because she's endorsed specific candidates that include non-Labour candidates. Not sure what side of the line she falls on, because she is largely notable for her Labour candidacies in the past. Happy for her Labour endorsements to be removed if others think that'd be sensible. Ralbegen ( talk) 13:42, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
The constituency list is now verrrrrrry long. Can we do an alphabet quick links thing to aid navigation? Something like at List of Doctor Who villains? Bondegezou ( talk) 11:50, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Page sizetool isn't that helpful in this case because it ignores all the text in bulleted lists, but I'd guess the text size is more like 40kB? The size rule also says that it applies more loosely to lists, so I don't think that it's likely that this article could ever have a high enough readable prose size to necessitate splitting.
Could I propose
this kind of layout? Either with countries or with the alphabet (version with the alphabet
here). We can use ToC Limit
so that any subsection that uses Example text
or more is disincluded from the contents. That way we can keep a single article, but also a manageable contents box.
Ralbegen (
talk) 16:30, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Would someone mind having a look at the mark up in the endorsements, please? I added gal-dem's endorsement but could format the table correctly. Thank you. -- Woofboy ( talk) 18:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
I removed two endorsements, Ralbegen re-added, discussion ensues. I accept both are marginal cases.
Stephen Walters is included on the basis of a tweet by LabourNorthWest containing a video clip. We have generally agreed on a pretty tight standard for endorsements, particularly those from social media. I am concerned this fails WP:V. The citation is to a political party, who are clearly not an independent source. If Walters had tweeted this, or even re-tweeted it, that would be acceptable under WP:PRIMARY, but he hasn't. It's probably true that Walters endorses Labour in this election, but we have a high evidential standard and we don't definitely know that Walters supports this. Maybe the video was done for the previous general election or European or local elections earlier this year.
Next is Ginger (musician). Here, we're dealing with his own tweet: good! In it, he says, "Please register to vote." And then, "If you don't know who to vote for, vote Labour." We've had discussion on project pages that endorsements have to be clear as endorsements. This is marginal, but he doesn't say, "Vote Labour!" His main plea is supporting voter registration (as with Walters too). He then couches his recommendation with "If you don't know who to vote for": is he saying, "Everyone should vote and I'm not bothered who for, just get registered", or is he saying "Register so that you can vote Labour"?
Read Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC_on_inclusion_criteria_for_lists_of_political_endorsements. That proposed tight restrictions and was broadly supported (but not entirely and with much discussion). Bondegezou ( talk) 17:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
The Hope Not Hate article this is sourced to alleges to have uncovered a secret "endorsement" of Brexit Party by Britain First, from a private text conversation on the messaging app Telegram. Who the parties involved in this alleged conversation were, or what, if any, official capacity they were representing BF in, is not established. This is the only example of an endorsement on this page which is not an actual public proclamation of support by the supposed endorser, but little more than a conspiracy theory by a third party. Additionally, HNH has been deprecated at WP:RSP, which states:
"Reliability should be assessed on a case by case basis, while taking context into account. Because they are an advocacy group, they are a biased and opinionated source and their statements should be attributed."
Given the context that HNH has a long history of feuding with Nigel Farage, and BF has not actually made any public endorsement of BP, this is not a suitable source for supporting an unattributed statement of fact that BF has endorsed BP. @ Ralbegen:, if you would like to keep BF listed as endorsing BP, please find an appropriate WP:RS. Thank you. 223.24.185.188 ( talk) 11:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Posting on Telegram ... Britain First said they’re “right behind them”.That's the entirety of the evidence "Scram News" presents establishing BF's "endorsement" of BP, an anonymous Telegram user's text conversation they attribute to BF. Who was this telegram user? Who were they talking to? What is their relation to BF? Where did Scram News see this conversation? It's all a mystery. Whether HNH are considered reliable by other sources or are experts on the far-right is neither here nor there. There's nothing here to reasonably base this endorsement on. 223.24.185.188 ( talk) 15:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
I fear some users editing this article has failed to read WP:DUE. The point of adding every random individual who supports party X or Y is certainly not due. Newspaper endorsements are relevant, but seeing that some darts player supports the Tories, or an artist in Beirut supports Labour...? Sure, it can be sourced, but it is certainly not due in any way to just add a long list of random individuals supporting one party or another. Jeppiz ( talk) 13:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Lots of endorsements by Rage Against the Machine at https://twitter.com/RATM/status/1204917431556284416?s=20 Bondegezou ( talk) 09:19, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I appreciate this effort to make an endorsement page, but we should probably wait until we have a full list of candidates that people can endorse. 2 endorsements is not enough to justify making a page. If you can find more endorsements, it will be fine, but otherwise wait.
KingWither (
talk)
I think that the list has grown to the point where it is legitimate. Best to have it now and add to it as the election continues. --
Brendanww2 (
talk) 21:25, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
If someone endorses a party as a whole but also campaigns for a specific candidate or candidates from that party, should that be listed in both sections or just in the Party endorsement section? -- Brendanww2 ( talk) 21:29, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
@ EddieHugh: removed several endorsements from the list. One because it was from the Daily Mail (fair enough); Trump because the source wasn't good enough (there are [ https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/10/why-labour-welcomes-donald-trumps-endorsement-boris-johnson others); Grist because the endorsement wasn't unambiguous enough (which is a fair point, though I think it's pretty unambiguous); and then several because they endorsed more than one party.
I think an explicit endorsement of more than one party is fine and worth including, as they were in the 2017 equivalent article. I don't think "vote tactically against [The Conservatives, Labour, etc]" is worth including unless it's from a print newspaper or magazine. But naming two specific parties seems fine to me. Interested to hear other editors' thoughts. Ralbegen ( talk) 15:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
"No doubt, the usual Leftie luvvies will come out for Jeremy Corbyn during the General Election campaign.
But Boris Johnson can count on the support of celebrated art duo Gilbert & George.
Gilbert Prousch says Boris would sometimes shout: 'Gilbert! George!' as he rode past them on his bicycle in London.
He tells me: 'That's more than enough for us. We know whose side he's on. People are trying to bring him down with all this 'liar, liar' stuff. It's quite appalling.'
The pair are also fans of Cabinet minister Michael Gove: 'He's brilliant,' says Gilbert, who gives Corbyn short shrift.
'Can you imagine if it was he who decided what art is? It would be all Nicaraguan posters.'"
More United has published a list of 34 endorsements. [1] In some constituencies (such as Ceredigion), they've endorsed two candidates who are standing against each other. They state in their criteria for endorsement: "Where there are two or more qualifying candidates in a constituency that seeks More United support, we may endorse both without providing financial support, subject to a members' vote." [2] I've included these cases in the article for now with "also endorsed" notes, but would it be better to omit them? EmphasisMine ( talk) 21:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Tony Blair is listed as endorsing Gordon Nardell, Labour candidate for the two cities. I don't think that it's worth including any endorsement from a politician for any candidate of the same party as them, and think that Blair shouldn't be listed as an endorser for any Labour candidate. Ralbegen ( talk) 18:30, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I've boldly included Emily Benn's endorsements of Labour candidates because she's endorsed specific candidates that include non-Labour candidates. Not sure what side of the line she falls on, because she is largely notable for her Labour candidacies in the past. Happy for her Labour endorsements to be removed if others think that'd be sensible. Ralbegen ( talk) 13:42, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
The constituency list is now verrrrrrry long. Can we do an alphabet quick links thing to aid navigation? Something like at List of Doctor Who villains? Bondegezou ( talk) 11:50, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Page sizetool isn't that helpful in this case because it ignores all the text in bulleted lists, but I'd guess the text size is more like 40kB? The size rule also says that it applies more loosely to lists, so I don't think that it's likely that this article could ever have a high enough readable prose size to necessitate splitting.
Could I propose
this kind of layout? Either with countries or with the alphabet (version with the alphabet
here). We can use ToC Limit
so that any subsection that uses Example text
or more is disincluded from the contents. That way we can keep a single article, but also a manageable contents box.
Ralbegen (
talk) 16:30, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Would someone mind having a look at the mark up in the endorsements, please? I added gal-dem's endorsement but could format the table correctly. Thank you. -- Woofboy ( talk) 18:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
I removed two endorsements, Ralbegen re-added, discussion ensues. I accept both are marginal cases.
Stephen Walters is included on the basis of a tweet by LabourNorthWest containing a video clip. We have generally agreed on a pretty tight standard for endorsements, particularly those from social media. I am concerned this fails WP:V. The citation is to a political party, who are clearly not an independent source. If Walters had tweeted this, or even re-tweeted it, that would be acceptable under WP:PRIMARY, but he hasn't. It's probably true that Walters endorses Labour in this election, but we have a high evidential standard and we don't definitely know that Walters supports this. Maybe the video was done for the previous general election or European or local elections earlier this year.
Next is Ginger (musician). Here, we're dealing with his own tweet: good! In it, he says, "Please register to vote." And then, "If you don't know who to vote for, vote Labour." We've had discussion on project pages that endorsements have to be clear as endorsements. This is marginal, but he doesn't say, "Vote Labour!" His main plea is supporting voter registration (as with Walters too). He then couches his recommendation with "If you don't know who to vote for": is he saying, "Everyone should vote and I'm not bothered who for, just get registered", or is he saying "Register so that you can vote Labour"?
Read Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC_on_inclusion_criteria_for_lists_of_political_endorsements. That proposed tight restrictions and was broadly supported (but not entirely and with much discussion). Bondegezou ( talk) 17:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
The Hope Not Hate article this is sourced to alleges to have uncovered a secret "endorsement" of Brexit Party by Britain First, from a private text conversation on the messaging app Telegram. Who the parties involved in this alleged conversation were, or what, if any, official capacity they were representing BF in, is not established. This is the only example of an endorsement on this page which is not an actual public proclamation of support by the supposed endorser, but little more than a conspiracy theory by a third party. Additionally, HNH has been deprecated at WP:RSP, which states:
"Reliability should be assessed on a case by case basis, while taking context into account. Because they are an advocacy group, they are a biased and opinionated source and their statements should be attributed."
Given the context that HNH has a long history of feuding with Nigel Farage, and BF has not actually made any public endorsement of BP, this is not a suitable source for supporting an unattributed statement of fact that BF has endorsed BP. @ Ralbegen:, if you would like to keep BF listed as endorsing BP, please find an appropriate WP:RS. Thank you. 223.24.185.188 ( talk) 11:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Posting on Telegram ... Britain First said they’re “right behind them”.That's the entirety of the evidence "Scram News" presents establishing BF's "endorsement" of BP, an anonymous Telegram user's text conversation they attribute to BF. Who was this telegram user? Who were they talking to? What is their relation to BF? Where did Scram News see this conversation? It's all a mystery. Whether HNH are considered reliable by other sources or are experts on the far-right is neither here nor there. There's nothing here to reasonably base this endorsement on. 223.24.185.188 ( talk) 15:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
I fear some users editing this article has failed to read WP:DUE. The point of adding every random individual who supports party X or Y is certainly not due. Newspaper endorsements are relevant, but seeing that some darts player supports the Tories, or an artist in Beirut supports Labour...? Sure, it can be sourced, but it is certainly not due in any way to just add a long list of random individuals supporting one party or another. Jeppiz ( talk) 13:20, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Lots of endorsements by Rage Against the Machine at https://twitter.com/RATM/status/1204917431556284416?s=20 Bondegezou ( talk) 09:19, 13 December 2019 (UTC)