|
![]() |
Primary article | Categories · Featured content · Templates |
This is the talk page for WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. | |||
---|---|---|---|
| |||
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 | |||
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Last month, I added the results to the page 2024 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council election. I included the raw results figures that were included on the declaration PDF and council web page (electorate, turnout percentage, rejected ballots), but I didn't add anything that had to be calculated manually (turnout, majority, vote percentages, percentage changes, swing).
Since then, other users have added those calculated figures - but they've also removed all of the Rejected Ballots ( Template:Election box rejected) lines from the results tables. This means that the tables now appears to have an inconsistency: the tables' "Turnout" raw figures column show the number of valid votes, but the "Turnout percentage" comes from the source results declaration, which is calculated using "Turnout = valid votes + rejected ballots". So anyone trying to confirm the figures based only on what's listed on this Wikipedia page will encounter this discrepancy.
So, my preference is to add the Rejected Ballots lines back in for the sake of comprehensiveness. (The figures are published, they're relevant to making the tables as accurate as possible, so why not include them?) However, I'm also aware that a lot of election results pages don't include them. (For example, the 2023 election page is the only one of that council's results pages that includes them.)
So, my question is: should I add the Template:Election box rejected lines back in? Nick R Talk 15:55, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Update July 2024, after the general election: Despite the above comment, I never got round to adding the rejected ballots numbers back into that local election page. But now that the general election has happened, I've encountered the issue again with being unsure which source of figures to use in the article Walsall and Bloxwich (UK Parliament constituency), as there are various slight differences between them. I've put together a more detailed comparison of the differences between them on its talk page, but to summarise:
(I think that the other seat with results announced by Walsall Council, Aldridge-Brownhills (UK Parliament constituency), has similar discrepancies, but I haven't looked into that in as much detail.)
Whichever one gets used as the source, there'll be a mismatch somewhere - even if that's a mismatch between what's used in the 2024 results table, and what was used in the articles for the two predecessor seats Walsall North and Walsall South (neither of which include lines for rejected ballots).
I've found related recent discussions about the inclusion of rejected ballots at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elections_and_Referendums/Archive_26#Calculation_of_election_percentages and Wikipedia_talk:No_original_research#Election_Percentages. (I was looking at the Wikipedia:NOR page because I wasn't sure if it's preferable to cite a primary source like the Council's declaration of results PDF, or a secondary source like the BBC's results pages.)
Also, when it comes to seat gains and swing changes, I'm unsure about whether Walsall and Bloxwich should be treated as a new constituency, or a continuation of the former seat Walsall North. (
2023 Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies#Linked_seats includes it in the "Linked seats" table, and the BBC seems to treat it as a continuation by describing it as Labour gain from Conservative - although as I said, I can't work out how the BBC has reached its turnout percentage change since 2019.) But that might be a better question for
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies or
Talk:2023 Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies.
Nick R
Talk
22:28, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
After a dispute at
Neil Kinnock with an IP, whether it should state politican who was Leader of the Opposition
vs the pre-existing politican who served as Leader of the Opposition
. Although, I probably forgot to argue that as "Leader" is capitalised it refers to a title rather than a general term. But after the IP reverted citing lack of policy, and avoiding edit warring, I raise it here. Should we adopt their shorter wording "was" and "is" over "served as" and "serving as" on politicans? If there is a guideline/consensus on this, apologies if I haven't found it.
Dank
Jae
10:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
becomesis a British politician who has served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Leader of the Conservative Party since 2022
?is a British politician who is the prime minister of the United Kingdom and leader of the Conservative Party since 2022
I've created a stub article for the Labour Party manifesto at Draft:2024 Labour Party Manifesto. I invite contributions to expand it to the point where it is ready to submit as an article. — The Anome ( talk) 12:43, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Is this really a notable topic? Recent edits suggest the title is not understood, at least, so I've tagged it. -- DeFacto ( talk). 08:16, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
are not necessarily the seats that the parties are choosing to target. If this is the case, why create such an article at all? Pinging the creator of this article as a courtesy: @ Moondragon21. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 01:35, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
A few years back, This is Paul contributed Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics_of_the_United_Kingdom/Archive_14#Police_and_Crime_Commissioners to raise a question about the notability of police and crime commissioners. We have an article for every incumbent PCC except Ben Adams (police commissioner), so I recently set about creating one for completeness. Although I thought it contained more well-sourced information than several other PCC articles, it was swiftly moved to Draft:Ben Adams (police commissioner) on the grounds that further sources were needed to demonstrate WP:Notability. A subsequent WP:AfC review was also unsuccessful, so it is languishing as a draft. This implies PCCs are still not considered inherently notable, unlike MPs, MSPs, directly elected mayors, etc. What are anyone's thoughts on this, and is there a way to establish/formalise consensus under WP:POLOUTCOMES? Failing that, would someone be willing to review Draft:Ben Adams (police commissioner) and move it to mainspace? AJP ( talk) 16:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Some time ago I created Category:Constituency contests in United Kingdom general elections and am coming back to it. While by-elections are well covered there are some very notable contests that although they seem to have been well covered by either the media at the time or in history books do not seem to have articles in Wikipedia.
If there are examples of constituency contests that already have articles that aren't covered then I'd be grateful so I can add them to this category. I'd also be grateful for suggestions for constituency contests that could do with articles (they will currently be redirects).
JASpencer ( talk) 04:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm currently drafting an article about the 2020 deputy speaker/chairman & deputy chairman of ways and means election in my sandbox, and I've got the current title of it as "2020 Chairman and Deputy Chairmen of Ways and Means of the British House of Commons election"
To me, that seems a bit too long, so does anyone have any better suggestion for a title? I've thought of "2020 Deputy Speakers of the British House of Commons election" as a possible alternative, but I don't know whether I should mention Deputy Speakers or Chairman/Deputy Chairmen of Ways and Means in the title. SuperGuy212 ( talk) 13:59, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
The current articles lack crucial information about the number of MPs for each party. For example, the Conservative Party (UK) infobox includes House of Lords, Scottish Parliament, etc but omits the vastly more important number of House of Commons MPs. Although MPs are technically not in office during the dissolution period, they still receive salaries and have staffed offices, making the omission of their numbers misleading. [1] I will add the MP numbers as of 30 May 2024 to the party infoboxes and include a note about the dissolution period. Additionally, I will restore the seat map on the UK House of Commons article with a similar note.
References
MarkiPoli ( talk) 15:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Would appreciate it if any users would like to make an input on whether a poll of GB News viewers is appropriate to include in the main table of polls on Opinion polling for the 2024 United Kingdom general election. Ralbegen ( talk) 16:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
I've been drafting an article, this time on the Tory election date betting scandal (link to it here), and I've given it the provisional title of "Gamblegate", as I can see people starting to call it that. Does anyone have any objections to this being the title of the article, and if so, do you have any suggestions for better titles before I move this to mainspace? SuperGuy212 ( talk) 17:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Is there any systematic way in which the many articles for newly-elected MPs will be created? Perhaps there are already a lot of drafts out there for likely candidates. Some new MPs will already have articles under other reasons for notability, but those articles will need some tweaking beyond just adding that they've been elected.
As one of the editors who rather enjoys the activity of "the Friday morning after the by-election", trying to make sure that the articles we collectively create follow our policies and have all the available infrastructure, I'd like to tentatively suggest a boiler-plate outline for creating articles for newly-elected MPs. See User:PamD/MP. It uses "code" and "nowiki" so you can just copy what's visible and paste it into a fledgling article. It gives a flying start with remembering the various bits and pieces which can improve the article - defaultsort, succession box, link for their parliamentary profile when available (usually around 8am after a byelection), etc.
Any thoughts or improvements? Should it have an infobox? Would it be useful as a page within this WikiProject? Feel free to improve or copy it wherever.
Or is there some scheme I don't know about whereby articles are already systematically mass-created?
And do we agree on the optimum wording for that lead sentence - there will be so many new articles, we may as well agree in advance over the next couple of days. (Or is there already a "Model MP article" somewhere with agreed wording?) I've suggested ...is a British xxx party politician elected as
Member of Parliament for [[[xxx (UK Parliament constituency)|xxx]] in the
general election held on 4 July 2024.
, but you might disagree.
Pam
D
14:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
@ Moondragon21, Chessrat, Ravenpuff, Ellwat, and Therequiembellishere: a few other editors who seem to enjoy working on newly-elected MPs. Pam D 14:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Has anyone been updating the UK Parliament constituency field in infoboxes for UK human settlements, ie. towns, villages etc? For example, I just checked St John’s Wood, and it had the old constituency, which I updated. However, Maida Vale has the correct constituency in the infobox. Might there be work to be done here? With the new boundaries, lots of settlements will be in different constituencies. Queen’s Park also needed updating. TrottieTrue ( talk) 00:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
I somewhat boldly edited the infobox for Rishi Sunak to reduce the ministerial offices he held (other than PM) to a single heading. This format is used for Israeli ministers, see Benny Gantz or Benjamin Netanyahu. I would advocate this as a clearer style, and in line with MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE ("The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance"). Someone who wants to a see the ministerial career of someone at a glance will discern it more with it in summary form of offices and years. This is particularly so with those who held quite a variety of office over time, Michael Gove or Alan Johnson. If I'm looking up Alan Johnson now, the at-a-glance information I'm interested in is more likely to be that he was SoS for WP, etc., rather than the PM who appointed him and who came before and after. That is relevant information to his biography and to Wikipedia, but defeats the purpose of an infobox if there's a heading for each separate office. Therefore, I've advocate grouping all ministerial offices under one heading, and similarly with all shadow ministerial offices. There could be debate about what merits its own heading, PM itself certainly would, for example. Iveagh Gardens ( talk) 18:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Once again, we see many people being newly elected as MPs (and the flurry of new interest in editing of related articles). In template:Officeholder and in free text, I have seen some squabbles over when a newly-elected MP "starts".
I can see a brief discussion from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/Archive 4#c-Road Wizard-2012-09-23T21:32:00.000Z-Grandiose-2012-09-23T21:25:00.000Z2012.
My understanding was that in this context, someone could not hold office until the the day the returning officer provided the constituency result.
The Polling was until 22:00. The first seat to be declared was Houghton and Sunderland South- at 23:15 on the same day as the polling, wereas the last was two days after the polling- Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire was the last seat to declare, due to multiple recounts after the election,
So, in this most recent election, results of declaration were announced across three dates.
Then there is the swearing in which might be an oath of allegiance or an affirmation.
The swearing in, might not be completed on the same day, according to IoG.
The Parliament website currently list "representation" dates for MPs- which seems to run from the date of election.
Drchriswilliams ( talk) 19:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
In order to centralise and clear up the ongoing debate around the inclusion of 4th, 5th, 6th etc parties in the GE2024 infobox, I have begun an RfC here. Your input would be greatly appreciated. CipherRephic ( talk) 00:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
I boldly (rashly?) edited the redirect " Deputy Leader of the Opposition (United Kingdom)" to point to " Shadow Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom", which seemed a more useful target than " Leader of the Opposition (United Kingdom)". The problem is that infoboxes for a number of politicians that pre-date the title of "Shadow Deputy Prime Minister" make use of the "deputy" parameter, and link to this redirect. I've put things back as I found them for now. How to resolve? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 12:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Help, please. I'm not a dab hand at tables, but thought it would be useful to add a table showing the complex origins of new seat Waveney Valley (UK Parliament constituency). I've carefully copied the code to get a bar of party colour ... but it isn't working. I've looked at it super-carefully and cannot see what's different between my attempt, in Waveney_Valley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Boundaries, and the table in Waveney_Valley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Members_of_Parliament and all the other examples I've looked at. I'm presumably missing something terribly obvious: please find it for me! (I thought of asking at the HelpDesk but thought I was more likely to find someone used to using this code here). (It turns out that it's pretty dull information for this seat, as all five contributing seats were previously the same party, but it seemed like an interesting table to add, for a completely new seat). Pam D 14:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Following the 2024 election, some party navboxes have become rather redundant: the extreme cases being Template:East of England Conservative Party MPs, which now only has one entry, and Template:Wales Conservative Party MPs, which is now empty and has been nominated for deletion. I think it might be useful if we consolidate the regional navboxes for Labour and the Conservatives into a single larger navbox, e.g. Template:Conservative Party UK MPs (which needs updating anyway), mirroring what is currently done for the other smaller parties. The Labour one might become a bit large, but we can nest the navboxes for each region and expand the relevant one as required for each MP's article. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 19:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm putting this here because the Daily Telegraph and The Spectator are explicitly political entities. They seem to have been seized as assets by Lloyds Bank as part of a financial dispute (see [1]). Does this mean that the entries regarding their being owned by Telegraph Media Group, owned in turn by Press Acquisitions Limited, owned in their turn by Press Holdings and May Corporation Limited and ultimately by Frederick Barclay, are no longer accurate, and all those articles should be updated to reflect this? — The Anome ( talk) 08:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Which of course is the official names of the company running candidates under the Reform UK label. I'm trying to find out what the difference is - the party used to have just supporters, now you can become a member. However, the organisation/party is completely controlled by its shareholders. Its article says ":Reform UK Party Ltd. has fifteen shares. Farage owns eight of these, giving him a controlling majority. The other shareholders are Tice, who holds five, and Chief Executive Paul Oakden and Party Treasurer Mehrtash A'Zami who each hold one share." Does anyone here have any information as to the significance of membership? I think this needs to be added to Political party affiliation in the United Kingdom. Oddly none of this is in the lead of Reform's article, and I'm discussing that on the article talk page. Doug Weller talk 08:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Robbie Moore (MP)#Requested move 7 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 22:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lady Henry Somerset#Requested move 14 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 22:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
|
![]() |
Primary article | Categories · Featured content · Templates |
This is the talk page for WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. | |||
---|---|---|---|
| |||
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 | |||
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Last month, I added the results to the page 2024 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council election. I included the raw results figures that were included on the declaration PDF and council web page (electorate, turnout percentage, rejected ballots), but I didn't add anything that had to be calculated manually (turnout, majority, vote percentages, percentage changes, swing).
Since then, other users have added those calculated figures - but they've also removed all of the Rejected Ballots ( Template:Election box rejected) lines from the results tables. This means that the tables now appears to have an inconsistency: the tables' "Turnout" raw figures column show the number of valid votes, but the "Turnout percentage" comes from the source results declaration, which is calculated using "Turnout = valid votes + rejected ballots". So anyone trying to confirm the figures based only on what's listed on this Wikipedia page will encounter this discrepancy.
So, my preference is to add the Rejected Ballots lines back in for the sake of comprehensiveness. (The figures are published, they're relevant to making the tables as accurate as possible, so why not include them?) However, I'm also aware that a lot of election results pages don't include them. (For example, the 2023 election page is the only one of that council's results pages that includes them.)
So, my question is: should I add the Template:Election box rejected lines back in? Nick R Talk 15:55, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Update July 2024, after the general election: Despite the above comment, I never got round to adding the rejected ballots numbers back into that local election page. But now that the general election has happened, I've encountered the issue again with being unsure which source of figures to use in the article Walsall and Bloxwich (UK Parliament constituency), as there are various slight differences between them. I've put together a more detailed comparison of the differences between them on its talk page, but to summarise:
(I think that the other seat with results announced by Walsall Council, Aldridge-Brownhills (UK Parliament constituency), has similar discrepancies, but I haven't looked into that in as much detail.)
Whichever one gets used as the source, there'll be a mismatch somewhere - even if that's a mismatch between what's used in the 2024 results table, and what was used in the articles for the two predecessor seats Walsall North and Walsall South (neither of which include lines for rejected ballots).
I've found related recent discussions about the inclusion of rejected ballots at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elections_and_Referendums/Archive_26#Calculation_of_election_percentages and Wikipedia_talk:No_original_research#Election_Percentages. (I was looking at the Wikipedia:NOR page because I wasn't sure if it's preferable to cite a primary source like the Council's declaration of results PDF, or a secondary source like the BBC's results pages.)
Also, when it comes to seat gains and swing changes, I'm unsure about whether Walsall and Bloxwich should be treated as a new constituency, or a continuation of the former seat Walsall North. (
2023 Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies#Linked_seats includes it in the "Linked seats" table, and the BBC seems to treat it as a continuation by describing it as Labour gain from Conservative - although as I said, I can't work out how the BBC has reached its turnout percentage change since 2019.) But that might be a better question for
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies or
Talk:2023 Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies.
Nick R
Talk
22:28, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
After a dispute at
Neil Kinnock with an IP, whether it should state politican who was Leader of the Opposition
vs the pre-existing politican who served as Leader of the Opposition
. Although, I probably forgot to argue that as "Leader" is capitalised it refers to a title rather than a general term. But after the IP reverted citing lack of policy, and avoiding edit warring, I raise it here. Should we adopt their shorter wording "was" and "is" over "served as" and "serving as" on politicans? If there is a guideline/consensus on this, apologies if I haven't found it.
Dank
Jae
10:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
becomesis a British politician who has served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Leader of the Conservative Party since 2022
?is a British politician who is the prime minister of the United Kingdom and leader of the Conservative Party since 2022
I've created a stub article for the Labour Party manifesto at Draft:2024 Labour Party Manifesto. I invite contributions to expand it to the point where it is ready to submit as an article. — The Anome ( talk) 12:43, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Is this really a notable topic? Recent edits suggest the title is not understood, at least, so I've tagged it. -- DeFacto ( talk). 08:16, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
are not necessarily the seats that the parties are choosing to target. If this is the case, why create such an article at all? Pinging the creator of this article as a courtesy: @ Moondragon21. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 01:35, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
A few years back, This is Paul contributed Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics_of_the_United_Kingdom/Archive_14#Police_and_Crime_Commissioners to raise a question about the notability of police and crime commissioners. We have an article for every incumbent PCC except Ben Adams (police commissioner), so I recently set about creating one for completeness. Although I thought it contained more well-sourced information than several other PCC articles, it was swiftly moved to Draft:Ben Adams (police commissioner) on the grounds that further sources were needed to demonstrate WP:Notability. A subsequent WP:AfC review was also unsuccessful, so it is languishing as a draft. This implies PCCs are still not considered inherently notable, unlike MPs, MSPs, directly elected mayors, etc. What are anyone's thoughts on this, and is there a way to establish/formalise consensus under WP:POLOUTCOMES? Failing that, would someone be willing to review Draft:Ben Adams (police commissioner) and move it to mainspace? AJP ( talk) 16:31, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Some time ago I created Category:Constituency contests in United Kingdom general elections and am coming back to it. While by-elections are well covered there are some very notable contests that although they seem to have been well covered by either the media at the time or in history books do not seem to have articles in Wikipedia.
If there are examples of constituency contests that already have articles that aren't covered then I'd be grateful so I can add them to this category. I'd also be grateful for suggestions for constituency contests that could do with articles (they will currently be redirects).
JASpencer ( talk) 04:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm currently drafting an article about the 2020 deputy speaker/chairman & deputy chairman of ways and means election in my sandbox, and I've got the current title of it as "2020 Chairman and Deputy Chairmen of Ways and Means of the British House of Commons election"
To me, that seems a bit too long, so does anyone have any better suggestion for a title? I've thought of "2020 Deputy Speakers of the British House of Commons election" as a possible alternative, but I don't know whether I should mention Deputy Speakers or Chairman/Deputy Chairmen of Ways and Means in the title. SuperGuy212 ( talk) 13:59, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
The current articles lack crucial information about the number of MPs for each party. For example, the Conservative Party (UK) infobox includes House of Lords, Scottish Parliament, etc but omits the vastly more important number of House of Commons MPs. Although MPs are technically not in office during the dissolution period, they still receive salaries and have staffed offices, making the omission of their numbers misleading. [1] I will add the MP numbers as of 30 May 2024 to the party infoboxes and include a note about the dissolution period. Additionally, I will restore the seat map on the UK House of Commons article with a similar note.
References
MarkiPoli ( talk) 15:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Would appreciate it if any users would like to make an input on whether a poll of GB News viewers is appropriate to include in the main table of polls on Opinion polling for the 2024 United Kingdom general election. Ralbegen ( talk) 16:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
I've been drafting an article, this time on the Tory election date betting scandal (link to it here), and I've given it the provisional title of "Gamblegate", as I can see people starting to call it that. Does anyone have any objections to this being the title of the article, and if so, do you have any suggestions for better titles before I move this to mainspace? SuperGuy212 ( talk) 17:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Is there any systematic way in which the many articles for newly-elected MPs will be created? Perhaps there are already a lot of drafts out there for likely candidates. Some new MPs will already have articles under other reasons for notability, but those articles will need some tweaking beyond just adding that they've been elected.
As one of the editors who rather enjoys the activity of "the Friday morning after the by-election", trying to make sure that the articles we collectively create follow our policies and have all the available infrastructure, I'd like to tentatively suggest a boiler-plate outline for creating articles for newly-elected MPs. See User:PamD/MP. It uses "code" and "nowiki" so you can just copy what's visible and paste it into a fledgling article. It gives a flying start with remembering the various bits and pieces which can improve the article - defaultsort, succession box, link for their parliamentary profile when available (usually around 8am after a byelection), etc.
Any thoughts or improvements? Should it have an infobox? Would it be useful as a page within this WikiProject? Feel free to improve or copy it wherever.
Or is there some scheme I don't know about whereby articles are already systematically mass-created?
And do we agree on the optimum wording for that lead sentence - there will be so many new articles, we may as well agree in advance over the next couple of days. (Or is there already a "Model MP article" somewhere with agreed wording?) I've suggested ...is a British xxx party politician elected as
Member of Parliament for [[[xxx (UK Parliament constituency)|xxx]] in the
general election held on 4 July 2024.
, but you might disagree.
Pam
D
14:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
@ Moondragon21, Chessrat, Ravenpuff, Ellwat, and Therequiembellishere: a few other editors who seem to enjoy working on newly-elected MPs. Pam D 14:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Has anyone been updating the UK Parliament constituency field in infoboxes for UK human settlements, ie. towns, villages etc? For example, I just checked St John’s Wood, and it had the old constituency, which I updated. However, Maida Vale has the correct constituency in the infobox. Might there be work to be done here? With the new boundaries, lots of settlements will be in different constituencies. Queen’s Park also needed updating. TrottieTrue ( talk) 00:26, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
I somewhat boldly edited the infobox for Rishi Sunak to reduce the ministerial offices he held (other than PM) to a single heading. This format is used for Israeli ministers, see Benny Gantz or Benjamin Netanyahu. I would advocate this as a clearer style, and in line with MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE ("The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance"). Someone who wants to a see the ministerial career of someone at a glance will discern it more with it in summary form of offices and years. This is particularly so with those who held quite a variety of office over time, Michael Gove or Alan Johnson. If I'm looking up Alan Johnson now, the at-a-glance information I'm interested in is more likely to be that he was SoS for WP, etc., rather than the PM who appointed him and who came before and after. That is relevant information to his biography and to Wikipedia, but defeats the purpose of an infobox if there's a heading for each separate office. Therefore, I've advocate grouping all ministerial offices under one heading, and similarly with all shadow ministerial offices. There could be debate about what merits its own heading, PM itself certainly would, for example. Iveagh Gardens ( talk) 18:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Once again, we see many people being newly elected as MPs (and the flurry of new interest in editing of related articles). In template:Officeholder and in free text, I have seen some squabbles over when a newly-elected MP "starts".
I can see a brief discussion from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/Archive 4#c-Road Wizard-2012-09-23T21:32:00.000Z-Grandiose-2012-09-23T21:25:00.000Z2012.
My understanding was that in this context, someone could not hold office until the the day the returning officer provided the constituency result.
The Polling was until 22:00. The first seat to be declared was Houghton and Sunderland South- at 23:15 on the same day as the polling, wereas the last was two days after the polling- Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire was the last seat to declare, due to multiple recounts after the election,
So, in this most recent election, results of declaration were announced across three dates.
Then there is the swearing in which might be an oath of allegiance or an affirmation.
The swearing in, might not be completed on the same day, according to IoG.
The Parliament website currently list "representation" dates for MPs- which seems to run from the date of election.
Drchriswilliams ( talk) 19:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
In order to centralise and clear up the ongoing debate around the inclusion of 4th, 5th, 6th etc parties in the GE2024 infobox, I have begun an RfC here. Your input would be greatly appreciated. CipherRephic ( talk) 00:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
I boldly (rashly?) edited the redirect " Deputy Leader of the Opposition (United Kingdom)" to point to " Shadow Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom", which seemed a more useful target than " Leader of the Opposition (United Kingdom)". The problem is that infoboxes for a number of politicians that pre-date the title of "Shadow Deputy Prime Minister" make use of the "deputy" parameter, and link to this redirect. I've put things back as I found them for now. How to resolve? Jean-de-Nivelle ( talk) 12:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Help, please. I'm not a dab hand at tables, but thought it would be useful to add a table showing the complex origins of new seat Waveney Valley (UK Parliament constituency). I've carefully copied the code to get a bar of party colour ... but it isn't working. I've looked at it super-carefully and cannot see what's different between my attempt, in Waveney_Valley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Boundaries, and the table in Waveney_Valley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Members_of_Parliament and all the other examples I've looked at. I'm presumably missing something terribly obvious: please find it for me! (I thought of asking at the HelpDesk but thought I was more likely to find someone used to using this code here). (It turns out that it's pretty dull information for this seat, as all five contributing seats were previously the same party, but it seemed like an interesting table to add, for a completely new seat). Pam D 14:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Following the 2024 election, some party navboxes have become rather redundant: the extreme cases being Template:East of England Conservative Party MPs, which now only has one entry, and Template:Wales Conservative Party MPs, which is now empty and has been nominated for deletion. I think it might be useful if we consolidate the regional navboxes for Labour and the Conservatives into a single larger navbox, e.g. Template:Conservative Party UK MPs (which needs updating anyway), mirroring what is currently done for the other smaller parties. The Labour one might become a bit large, but we can nest the navboxes for each region and expand the relevant one as required for each MP's article. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 19:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm putting this here because the Daily Telegraph and The Spectator are explicitly political entities. They seem to have been seized as assets by Lloyds Bank as part of a financial dispute (see [1]). Does this mean that the entries regarding their being owned by Telegraph Media Group, owned in turn by Press Acquisitions Limited, owned in their turn by Press Holdings and May Corporation Limited and ultimately by Frederick Barclay, are no longer accurate, and all those articles should be updated to reflect this? — The Anome ( talk) 08:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Which of course is the official names of the company running candidates under the Reform UK label. I'm trying to find out what the difference is - the party used to have just supporters, now you can become a member. However, the organisation/party is completely controlled by its shareholders. Its article says ":Reform UK Party Ltd. has fifteen shares. Farage owns eight of these, giving him a controlling majority. The other shareholders are Tice, who holds five, and Chief Executive Paul Oakden and Party Treasurer Mehrtash A'Zami who each hold one share." Does anyone here have any information as to the significance of membership? I think this needs to be added to Political party affiliation in the United Kingdom. Oddly none of this is in the lead of Reform's article, and I'm discussing that on the article talk page. Doug Weller talk 08:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Robbie Moore (MP)#Requested move 7 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 22:35, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lady Henry Somerset#Requested move 14 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 22:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)