Talk:Coatbridge and Chryston (Scottish Parliament constituency)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Info boxes[edit]

Not sure the "Politics and Government of Scotland" box really fits this article. It was useful as a 'space saver' prior to introduction of the new info box at the top of the page, but it seems designed for articles actually listed in the box itself. Laurel Bush 11:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Slightly tangential to your question, but why on earth are we reproducing that constituency box on every article? Surely it would be far better to make it a template?!? That is why we have templates: to reproduce the same thing multiple times. --Mais oui! 11:39, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template-dependent info boxes can be an awful pain. Miscalculate in a template and you repeat the same error over a whole range of articles, and the error may be impossible to fix without creating a totally new template and substituting in each and every article. Perhaps when a 'standard info box' is well established and accepted it should be turned into a template. Laurel Bush 16:21, 13 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

There is a related message in "Template talk:Infobox Scotland council area". Laurel Bush 17:18, 13 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Fixing impossible without creating a new template? Actually, in a particular article you can convert a box to one which is template-independent and better tailored to the particular article. I am seeing a few boxes in articles about council areas which might benefit from this treatment. Laurel Bush 09:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coatbridge and Chryston (Scottish Parliament constituency). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070921124603/http://www.bcomm-scotland.gov.uk/ to http://www.bcomm-scotland.gov.uk/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:46, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]