This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
This template was considered for deletion on 24 August 2021. The result of the discussion was "no consensus". |
I'd argue that this figure is meaningful only for the major parties who fielded candidates in all, or most, constituencies. A more meaningful metric would be "% of votes in those seats contested". This would provide a far more valid basis for comparison. Martinevans123 ( talk) 12:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
The colour currently listed for Independents / parties without colours is white, but the template should actually list it as grey. One of the parties (the Something New party to be exact) actually has white as its official party colour. I suggest we look into the matter and change it somehow. AlexTeddy888 ( talk) 13:10, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
For the Speaker - is his figure double-counted somewhere (in the Conservative, independent, or no-description rows)? Neither the BBC News tally nor the Guardian tally separate him out. I want to make sure we're not duplicating those numbers somewhere. Neutrality talk 19:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Using this as my guide, I realized that the BBC's figures for the Tories' seat gains and losses are wrong (330-302=28) but also that both the BBC's and the Guardian's figures for Labour's seat gains and losses are wrong (256-232=24). I'm going to change back the figures for the Tories in our table, but I don't know what we should do about Labour. I've checked several other newspaper and magazine sites, and the only one that had similar figures was the Spectator, which says (rather disconcertingly) that the Tories actually won 329 seats but also has incorrect figures for Labour's seat gains and losses. I really hope someone doesn't have to go through the individual constituencies and count the gains and losses one by one. Esszet ( talk) 19:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Whenever I click any of the sort buttons, the data just becomes a mess and fails to sort.
It's fine in the default view. Here is an example of a "sorted view" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarinetguyuk ( talk • contribs) 02:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
In the results table for every previous UK general election, the parties are ordered by votes, not seats. See here, here, here, and here for examples. Esszet ( talk) 15:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
There has been a massive edit on the internal body styles that could appear confusing to some. I don't see what's the point of this since there is no visible change. Could someone help? AlexTeddy888 ( talk) 14:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
This template was considered for deletion on 24 August 2021. The result of the discussion was "no consensus". |
I'd argue that this figure is meaningful only for the major parties who fielded candidates in all, or most, constituencies. A more meaningful metric would be "% of votes in those seats contested". This would provide a far more valid basis for comparison. Martinevans123 ( talk) 12:59, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
The colour currently listed for Independents / parties without colours is white, but the template should actually list it as grey. One of the parties (the Something New party to be exact) actually has white as its official party colour. I suggest we look into the matter and change it somehow. AlexTeddy888 ( talk) 13:10, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
For the Speaker - is his figure double-counted somewhere (in the Conservative, independent, or no-description rows)? Neither the BBC News tally nor the Guardian tally separate him out. I want to make sure we're not duplicating those numbers somewhere. Neutrality talk 19:07, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Using this as my guide, I realized that the BBC's figures for the Tories' seat gains and losses are wrong (330-302=28) but also that both the BBC's and the Guardian's figures for Labour's seat gains and losses are wrong (256-232=24). I'm going to change back the figures for the Tories in our table, but I don't know what we should do about Labour. I've checked several other newspaper and magazine sites, and the only one that had similar figures was the Spectator, which says (rather disconcertingly) that the Tories actually won 329 seats but also has incorrect figures for Labour's seat gains and losses. I really hope someone doesn't have to go through the individual constituencies and count the gains and losses one by one. Esszet ( talk) 19:58, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Whenever I click any of the sort buttons, the data just becomes a mess and fails to sort.
It's fine in the default view. Here is an example of a "sorted view" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarinetguyuk ( talk • contribs) 02:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
In the results table for every previous UK general election, the parties are ordered by votes, not seats. See here, here, here, and here for examples. Esszet ( talk) 15:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
There has been a massive edit on the internal body styles that could appear confusing to some. I don't see what's the point of this since there is no visible change. Could someone help? AlexTeddy888 ( talk) 14:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)