|
![]() |
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. |
The Prime Minister has announced that the 58th Parliament of the United Kingdom will be dissolved on 30th May and a general election will be held on 4th July.
Veteran members of this WikiProject will be a familiar with an issue that I have raised at many prior elections - upon dissolution of the legislative body its members lose their status as such and thus can no longer use the relevant post-nominals (e.g. MP, MSP, MLA, AM). This requires us as Wikipedians to spend a great many hours frantically editing hundreds of pages to remove any reference to incumbency at the start of the campaign... then a load more hours adding them back in again after the results come in.
In 2021, in advance of the Senedd election, I came up with a solution that seemed to be reasonably well received - a flair that could be put at the top of all relevant biographies for the duration of the election period and then removed afterwards. This gives all necessary disclaimers and avoids us having to dig deep into the details of each individual article to make multiple edits. I have devised one for the upcoming election and would like to see it enacted when the time comes.
![]() | This article's subject is
standing for re-election to the
UK's House of Commons on 4 July, and has not been an MP since
Parliament's dissolution on 30 May, so this article may be out of date during this period. |
Obviously this only needs to be used for those incumbents who are seeking re-election. Those who are stepping down can go straight to proper rewrites. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 21:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: The subject of this article is standing for re-election to the British House of Commons. They will not be an MP once Parliament is dissolved. This article may be out of date.
Note: The subject of this article is standing for re-election to the British House of Commons. They ceased to be an MP when Parliament was dissolved. This article may be out of date.
It occurs to me that we could also do to have similar flairs on the articles about Parliament itself and the major parties contesting the election (as the "state of the parties" information will obviously be in limbo). Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 21:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I've started adding the flairs to pages now. I should have them done by Thursday. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 10:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Okay, we're at dissolution eve now. I don't know exactly what time of day it will be happening so I can't guarantee I'll be at my computer for the event. I'm hoping that somebody here will be. All you need to do is keep watching the news until the royal proclamation is read out, then revert the template to my edit as of 19:47 on 29 May. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 19:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Parliamentary sources seem to be indicating that Parliament dissolved just past midnight. This is probably not correct under the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022 so I would recommend holding any changes to the template until the proclamation is made. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 06:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
The proclamation has now been agreed by the Privy Council so I am updating the flair.
I was going to come and ask when dissolution is. For those MPs who have announced stepping down can we put end dates of 30 May 2024, or do we need to wait until candidate lists are announced with them absent to do that? Do any re-writes need to wait unti 1st June? Rankersbo ( talk) 06:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Editors have changed the infoboxes for various political parties, e.g. Labour, Reform UK, to say they have 0/650 seats on the grounds that Parliament has been dissolved and therefore technically there are no current MPs.
However, that’s wrong. A bar saying 0/650 is misleading. If you arguing there are no current MPs, then the denominator also needs to be zero.
Can we agree what to do here? 0/650 bars is wrong. I suggest we show the MPs at dissolution and use a footnote to explain that the figure is the figure at dissolution. Alternately, remove the bar and just have a note saying there are no MPs at present. Bondegezou ( talk) 14:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
There are currently no MPs – all seats in the House of Commons are vacant until after the general election on 4th July 2024. That sounds like 0/650 to me.
There are currently no MPs. How many Labour MPs are there? 0/0. Bondegezou ( talk) 07:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
all seats in the House of Commons are vacant, meaning there are currently 650 empty MP seats. So there are 0/650 seats taken by Labour MPs currently.
Do you think it makes clear to the reader what’s going on for all party infoboxes to switch to 0/650? Or to say there are no MPs because Parliament is dissolved? Which increases understanding more? Bondegezou ( talk) 08:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Recently there seems to have been a purging of references to ordinal numbers in relation to Parliaments of the United Kingdom, both in articles about said parliaments themselves and about general elections. The justification seems to be that these are never actually used. While they may not turn up often in common parlance, there are instances of ordinals appearing in official documents - such as this Hansard reference from 16 March 1992:
Parliament was prorogued to Monday, 23rd March at twenty three minutes past four o'clock. The Parliament was dissolved by Royal Proclamation on Monday, 16th March 1992. End of the Fifth Session of the Fiftieth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the forty-first year of the Reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
or this one from 21 March 1997:
End of the Fifth Session (opened on 23 October 1996) of the Fifty-First Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in the Forty-Sixth Year of the Reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second.
It seems to be fairly common for Hansard to reference this at the end of a session - see 1918, 1930, 1953, 1977, 1985, 1996, 1999, 2003, 2012 and 2021 to name just a few examples.
I would particularly like to restore the use of ordinals when referring to the act of dissolution, since it can be a little confusing to name parliaments after they years of their beginning when talking about their endings. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 15:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm currently drafting an article here, and I want some help with trying to interpret the document I used to make the article (which is here.
The big thing I have is I don't really know what the number next to the ward name is (so for example, in the document, the first section for this specific election is "Blundson (1977)". I don't know whether this is the turnout, the registered electors in that ward, or something else entirely. If someone could help me try and figure out what this number means, that'd be helpful.
SuperGuy212 ( talk) 09:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Is anyone planning on creating a complete and consistent set of maps for the new constituencies? Some work has been done and is available at commons:Category:2023 Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies, but most of England is still missing, and the available files vary in terms of the naming convention used (some have "2023", others "2024"), and more subtle things like stroke width and level of boundary detail. There's also some inconsistency in the extent of these maps: should they highlight a constituency in a particular region (e.g. East of England) or a ceremonial county? I'm also interested in hearing whether we should move away from the conventional pink-and-red colour scheme. The risk of confusion with Labour is admittedly small, but I think it would look more professional to use a neutral colour, e.g. grey.
I would be happy to provide a new consistent set of maps for this purpose, starting from the official ONS boundaries, but am starting this discussion in case someone else is already doing so or would like to provide some input. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 15:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
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)
Another question about 2024 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council election:
The article notes that in that election, "The seats up for election this year were last elected in 2021." So, should the tables' "±%" and "Swing" figures measure the change since 2023 (the last election in those council wards), or since 2021 (the last election for these specific seats)?
Checking a few of the figures, it looks like the "±%" numbers have been calculated using the first method: they're based on comparison to 2023. However, in the 2023 results article, it looks like they've been calculated with the second method: based on comparison to 2019.
(I only checked the "±%" numbers; I didn't check Swing because I'm less comfortable calculating that).
So, which are the correct comparisons to use for "±%" and "Swing"? Nick R Talk 16:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello! There is an RFC at the reliable sources noticeboard regarding a subject relevant to this Wikiproject. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I am currently updating GeoJSON mapdata used for interactive UK constituency maps to reflect the new constituency boundaries. I am also adding the interactive maps to the relevant infobox (example here) along with an SVG regional locator map.
There is precedent for this, for example, US Congressional Districts include the interactive map in the infobox (see here) and my view is that they are much more useful to the reader than static SVG maps which are outdated and archaic, and I therefore believe they should be the most prominent map used in the article.
We previously included SVG locator maps of the constituency within the parent ceremonial county, however, following the recent boundary changes, constituencies are no longer wholly contained within or coterminous with ceremonial counties. It would be almost impossible to continue with this practice, so I have therefore moved towards regional locator maps instead.
Pinging interested users for views @ Number 57 @ Rcsprinter123 @ Ravenpuff Mirrorme22 ( talk) 07:54, 10 June 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
Started a discussion on Talk:Oxford City Council regarding an issue with the political parties module which has over the course of a week gained no traction whatsoever - would appreciate it if any of you could read it and give input :) CipherRephic ( talk) 22:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
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)
There are list of renamed constituencies with articles under old names and pages with new name are redirects to old articles. Here's a list of such constituencies I've found just in East Midlands and East of England (link to redirect pages):
And I'm sure there are more. I don't want to just copy and loose all the history but mismatched name, not being highlighted in templates etc. is no bueno as well. Can someone do it properly? Pinging @ Number 57 @ Rcsprinter123 @ Ravenpuff @ Mirrorme22 @ DankJae @ Bondegezou ‒ Sfaxx ( talk) 01:05, 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)
|
![]() |
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. |
The Prime Minister has announced that the 58th Parliament of the United Kingdom will be dissolved on 30th May and a general election will be held on 4th July.
Veteran members of this WikiProject will be a familiar with an issue that I have raised at many prior elections - upon dissolution of the legislative body its members lose their status as such and thus can no longer use the relevant post-nominals (e.g. MP, MSP, MLA, AM). This requires us as Wikipedians to spend a great many hours frantically editing hundreds of pages to remove any reference to incumbency at the start of the campaign... then a load more hours adding them back in again after the results come in.
In 2021, in advance of the Senedd election, I came up with a solution that seemed to be reasonably well received - a flair that could be put at the top of all relevant biographies for the duration of the election period and then removed afterwards. This gives all necessary disclaimers and avoids us having to dig deep into the details of each individual article to make multiple edits. I have devised one for the upcoming election and would like to see it enacted when the time comes.
![]() | This article's subject is
standing for re-election to the
UK's House of Commons on 4 July, and has not been an MP since
Parliament's dissolution on 30 May, so this article may be out of date during this period. |
Obviously this only needs to be used for those incumbents who are seeking re-election. Those who are stepping down can go straight to proper rewrites. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 21:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: The subject of this article is standing for re-election to the British House of Commons. They will not be an MP once Parliament is dissolved. This article may be out of date.
Note: The subject of this article is standing for re-election to the British House of Commons. They ceased to be an MP when Parliament was dissolved. This article may be out of date.
It occurs to me that we could also do to have similar flairs on the articles about Parliament itself and the major parties contesting the election (as the "state of the parties" information will obviously be in limbo). Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 21:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I've started adding the flairs to pages now. I should have them done by Thursday. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 10:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Okay, we're at dissolution eve now. I don't know exactly what time of day it will be happening so I can't guarantee I'll be at my computer for the event. I'm hoping that somebody here will be. All you need to do is keep watching the news until the royal proclamation is read out, then revert the template to my edit as of 19:47 on 29 May. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 19:54, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Parliamentary sources seem to be indicating that Parliament dissolved just past midnight. This is probably not correct under the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022 so I would recommend holding any changes to the template until the proclamation is made. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 06:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
The proclamation has now been agreed by the Privy Council so I am updating the flair.
I was going to come and ask when dissolution is. For those MPs who have announced stepping down can we put end dates of 30 May 2024, or do we need to wait until candidate lists are announced with them absent to do that? Do any re-writes need to wait unti 1st June? Rankersbo ( talk) 06:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Editors have changed the infoboxes for various political parties, e.g. Labour, Reform UK, to say they have 0/650 seats on the grounds that Parliament has been dissolved and therefore technically there are no current MPs.
However, that’s wrong. A bar saying 0/650 is misleading. If you arguing there are no current MPs, then the denominator also needs to be zero.
Can we agree what to do here? 0/650 bars is wrong. I suggest we show the MPs at dissolution and use a footnote to explain that the figure is the figure at dissolution. Alternately, remove the bar and just have a note saying there are no MPs at present. Bondegezou ( talk) 14:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
There are currently no MPs – all seats in the House of Commons are vacant until after the general election on 4th July 2024. That sounds like 0/650 to me.
There are currently no MPs. How many Labour MPs are there? 0/0. Bondegezou ( talk) 07:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
all seats in the House of Commons are vacant, meaning there are currently 650 empty MP seats. So there are 0/650 seats taken by Labour MPs currently.
Do you think it makes clear to the reader what’s going on for all party infoboxes to switch to 0/650? Or to say there are no MPs because Parliament is dissolved? Which increases understanding more? Bondegezou ( talk) 08:06, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Recently there seems to have been a purging of references to ordinal numbers in relation to Parliaments of the United Kingdom, both in articles about said parliaments themselves and about general elections. The justification seems to be that these are never actually used. While they may not turn up often in common parlance, there are instances of ordinals appearing in official documents - such as this Hansard reference from 16 March 1992:
Parliament was prorogued to Monday, 23rd March at twenty three minutes past four o'clock. The Parliament was dissolved by Royal Proclamation on Monday, 16th March 1992. End of the Fifth Session of the Fiftieth Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the forty-first year of the Reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
or this one from 21 March 1997:
End of the Fifth Session (opened on 23 October 1996) of the Fifty-First Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in the Forty-Sixth Year of the Reign of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second.
It seems to be fairly common for Hansard to reference this at the end of a session - see 1918, 1930, 1953, 1977, 1985, 1996, 1999, 2003, 2012 and 2021 to name just a few examples.
I would particularly like to restore the use of ordinals when referring to the act of dissolution, since it can be a little confusing to name parliaments after they years of their beginning when talking about their endings. Robin S. Taylor ( talk) 15:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm currently drafting an article here, and I want some help with trying to interpret the document I used to make the article (which is here.
The big thing I have is I don't really know what the number next to the ward name is (so for example, in the document, the first section for this specific election is "Blundson (1977)". I don't know whether this is the turnout, the registered electors in that ward, or something else entirely. If someone could help me try and figure out what this number means, that'd be helpful.
SuperGuy212 ( talk) 09:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Is anyone planning on creating a complete and consistent set of maps for the new constituencies? Some work has been done and is available at commons:Category:2023 Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies, but most of England is still missing, and the available files vary in terms of the naming convention used (some have "2023", others "2024"), and more subtle things like stroke width and level of boundary detail. There's also some inconsistency in the extent of these maps: should they highlight a constituency in a particular region (e.g. East of England) or a ceremonial county? I'm also interested in hearing whether we should move away from the conventional pink-and-red colour scheme. The risk of confusion with Labour is admittedly small, but I think it would look more professional to use a neutral colour, e.g. grey.
I would be happy to provide a new consistent set of maps for this purpose, starting from the official ONS boundaries, but am starting this discussion in case someone else is already doing so or would like to provide some input. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 15:28, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
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)
Another question about 2024 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council election:
The article notes that in that election, "The seats up for election this year were last elected in 2021." So, should the tables' "±%" and "Swing" figures measure the change since 2023 (the last election in those council wards), or since 2021 (the last election for these specific seats)?
Checking a few of the figures, it looks like the "±%" numbers have been calculated using the first method: they're based on comparison to 2023. However, in the 2023 results article, it looks like they've been calculated with the second method: based on comparison to 2019.
(I only checked the "±%" numbers; I didn't check Swing because I'm less comfortable calculating that).
So, which are the correct comparisons to use for "±%" and "Swing"? Nick R Talk 16:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello! There is an RFC at the reliable sources noticeboard regarding a subject relevant to this Wikiproject. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I am currently updating GeoJSON mapdata used for interactive UK constituency maps to reflect the new constituency boundaries. I am also adding the interactive maps to the relevant infobox (example here) along with an SVG regional locator map.
There is precedent for this, for example, US Congressional Districts include the interactive map in the infobox (see here) and my view is that they are much more useful to the reader than static SVG maps which are outdated and archaic, and I therefore believe they should be the most prominent map used in the article.
We previously included SVG locator maps of the constituency within the parent ceremonial county, however, following the recent boundary changes, constituencies are no longer wholly contained within or coterminous with ceremonial counties. It would be almost impossible to continue with this practice, so I have therefore moved towards regional locator maps instead.
Pinging interested users for views @ Number 57 @ Rcsprinter123 @ Ravenpuff Mirrorme22 ( talk) 07:54, 10 June 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
Started a discussion on Talk:Oxford City Council regarding an issue with the political parties module which has over the course of a week gained no traction whatsoever - would appreciate it if any of you could read it and give input :) CipherRephic ( talk) 22:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
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)
There are list of renamed constituencies with articles under old names and pages with new name are redirects to old articles. Here's a list of such constituencies I've found just in East Midlands and East of England (link to redirect pages):
And I'm sure there are more. I don't want to just copy and loose all the history but mismatched name, not being highlighted in templates etc. is no bueno as well. Can someone do it properly? Pinging @ Number 57 @ Rcsprinter123 @ Ravenpuff @ Mirrorme22 @ DankJae @ Bondegezou ‒ Sfaxx ( talk) 01:05, 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)