Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom/Archive 17
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 |
"Term Start"
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)
- If the UK Parliament website gives 4 July as the start date, even for the MP whose seat didn't declare until Saturday 6th, then that's good enough for me, and for Wikipedia. It has been discussed before, and we have agreed that the term start = election date. PamD 21:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Although, what you link to doesn't really make clear what "4 July" actually signifies. The line above it says "Elected 1 time". What's certain is they were all elected on 4 July whenever the result was called. I think the question probably revolves around how significant is the swearing in, i.e. is that when they technically become MPs and between 4 July and then they are merely "MPs-elect". Are the Sinn Fein MPs technically MPs, for instance? I couldn't find any RS discussing that. DeCausa (talk) 21:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I won't argue with the source in terms of what goes in the box, but clearly the 4th is not technically the date they 'Assumed office', aside from the few counts called before midnight. You can't begin a job before you are confirmed as having the job. Crowsus (talk) 01:23, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think it is the established convention that MPs become MPs on polling day, as reflected in the Parliament website and elsewhere. It might be written down in legislation somewhere but I can't find where it might be. It's probably also incorrect if MPs elected at the same election have different start dates simply based on the declaration of results, the timing of which I don't believe holds any legal significance. The "Assumed office" wording is probably not helpful in these cases, so I think it's best interpreted as the date of election (i.e. 4 July) in all cases. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 19:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Party navboxes
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 agree with the suggested approach. Rcsprinter123 (report) 22:15, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have now updated Template:Conservative Party UK MPs and Template:Labour Party UK MPs as examples of how the above suggestions could work. The Labour navbox employs collapsible groups (otherwise it would be far too long when expanded), while the Conservative navbox is short enough to use the usual style. Comments welcome — RAVENPVFF · talk · 02:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Daily Telegraph and Spectator ownership
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)
Reform UK Party Ltd - difference between members and supporters?
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)
Requested move at Talk:Robbie Moore (MP)#Requested move 7 July 2024
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/Information.svg/30px-Information.svg.png)
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)
Requested move at Talk:Lady Henry Somerset#Requested move 14 July 2024
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/28/Information.svg/30px-Information.svg.png)
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)
Metropolitan Borough Vote Share Changes Discrepancy
As mentioned earlier on this page, although not resolved then, there is a discrepancy among the change reported for councils which elect 1/3 of their councillors in each election, such as the current metropolitan boroughs. For all of the pages I've encountered, the per-ward change in vote share is reported from the last election to that term, four years prior, however, for the change in vote share across the council, it's split between the change from the election most recent or from the election four years prior.
In my opinion, it makes the most sense to have both changes from the same point, and to have that point be from four years prior. In all elections, incumbency plays a role, and in local elections especially, so to disregard the effect it has in the small scale would be to muddle the picture of the results, even if slightly. Other elections on Wikipedia which contain cycles of representatives elected with an offset take the shifts from the election for that seat, most notably those of the US Senate (see these examples). If we were to refer to reputable sources which record results by council, namely the work done by Rallings and Thrasher (e.g. [2]), these vote swings are from the election four years prior.
Finally, I wanted to give a hypothetical example of how representing the change in vote share from the most recent election (whether one or two years before) can be confusing. Now, I don't know if this has happened, but it's a reasonable situation that we should try to consider. Imagine a situation where 4 incumbents defect to form their own party and win reelection in 2024. They don't run candidates in the next two elections, but all four run again in 2028. If, say, two win and two lose, we'd show the party having lost two seats, but next to the vote share, it'd say New. And to me, if I saw that, it wouldn't make sense. I know this is only an example, but I think it shows how going off of the most recent election and not the one four years before can make things more confusing and harder to understand. AnOpenBook (talk) 04:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Article for creation: The Chris Smith List
Not sure if I can add this to “Articles for creation”, as it isn’t drafted. I think the LGBT+ Labour campaign fund The Chris Smith List could be notable enough for an article - anyone care to have a go? TrottieTrue (talk) 22:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Lord Chancellor
Hi I think all holder of the Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain should have this in their info box, because you need consistency and also have the Monarch and Prime Minister as well.86.147.210.198 (talk) 18:08, 27 July 2024 (UTC)