|WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Cornwall||(Rated Start-class, Top-importance)|
Image copyright problem with File:Cornwall.jpg
The image File:Cornwall.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
- A fair use rationale has been added to the image for Cornwall County Council. --Joowwww (talk) 21:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
2009 Cornwall Council results
The paragraph starting "Several of the Independents elected profess to be well known Cornish campaigners such as ..." goes on to list 31 out of 32 Independents. As a bystander:
- stating "Several" then listing nearly all the Independents looks comical,
- it looks biased against Independent #32,
- the description "well known Cornish campaigners" looks nonsensical, (after all they all had to campaign for election didn't they?),
- it looks to violate WP:NPOV listing nearly all the Independents and none of the party-affiliated councillors, and
- a listing of councillors doesn't satisfy the criterion of notability.
Several recent edit seem to be painting the impression that the council is heavily in favour independence. I think this is getting close to WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, [[N WP:NPOV]] and WP:CRYSTAL. We have some woolly statements by Cameron and Clegg about vague and limited devolution plans. We have some opinion pieces by Biscoe and reports on trips by Biscoe and Long. How is a couple of councillors going on a trips worthy of inclusion here? This seems to be WP:UNDUE as MK only have 5 councillors and if we include Bicsoe thats 6 out of 123. --Salix (talk): 10:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- I will assume by independence you mean devolution, independence is mentioned nowhere in the article.
- prove to me that it is a minority viewpoint, by all means. Those trips were deemed worthy of the newspapers and BBC reporting on them, and they deal with the future plans for the council set up by the Lib-Dems as a route to devolution. Biscoe is an independent councillor, of which there are a large group, and as such is part of the governing coalition of the council. Many other councillors in the independent group are what might be termed "Cornish nationalists" and I am aware of several councillors of various groups who are former or even current members of Mebyon Kernow. You may say they are vague and limited, but they are plans for the future of Cornwall Council nonetheless.
- Where is the evidence for your view. I've looked through the councils press releases for August last year no mention of the Biscoe organized trip. Was this trip sanctioned by the council in any way? And Long's trip, he went to visit some friends, and while there given a trip round the Parliament. These both seem to be actions taken independently of the council. As such maybe appropriate on the Mebyon Kernow page. But if we look at the council press releases its hard to find any mention of devolution, plenty else going on. How is one councillor's trip while on holiday not undue weight? --Salix (talk): 09:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Looking at this so far, I do feel that it is worth mentioning the devolution issue/Cornish Assembly, as it was stated in the UA's bid documentation, but it should only be briefly mentioned (if at all) in the lead and the wider text with the Cameron/Clegg statements being in the body text somewhere, as per WP:LEAD.
- But looking at the "International Relations" section, I feel that this is beginning to WP:COATRACK the article and is being given undue weight (this is a local authority after all) - with all the information on schemes and memberships, it's sounding like a collection of news reports (see WP:NOT#NEWSREPORTS). I'll sort out this section by condensing the 1st paragraph and bullets, as at the moment parts are directly copy-pasted off CC website, condense some of the memberships and descriptions, especially as some descriptions would be better off in the organisations' on red-linked articles. I also agree that the paragraph on Andrew Long should be moved to the Mebyon Kernow article, as he neither represents the decision making body of the council, the cabinet or one of the cabinets' political parties, so I'll be bold and move this over. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 12:21, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Bias: the lead specifically
I agree with some of the concerns raised above re neutrality and undue weight. Currently, the final para of the lead reads like a tract from a Cornish nationalist group and suggests that the council - rather than being, er, a local council - is an institutional stepping stone on the inexorable path to devolution or even independence, and that this is widely accepted in the wider body politic. There needs to be something about this aspect of the politics and the aspirations of some in Cornwall, but in proportion, in place and in context. More specifically, there are problems with the sourcing and phrasing of each of the statements in the paragraph. Apologies for the length, but they do need to be picked apart in some detail ..
- Cornwall's unitary authority, as its bid document endorsed by Parliament states, is a "stepping stone to a Cornish Assembly" - this, as written, suggests that the UK parliament has voted in support of the eventual establishment of such an assembly. Well, it hasn't. And the source for this claim appears to be a quasi-blog/op-ed column on a local media website. Not only has the phrasing of this writer been directly copy-pasted here, but this is one person's unattributed opinion, from a source that probably fails wp:rs.
- It has been suggested that powers and privileges, belonging to the Duchy and Stannaries of Cornwall, could be merged with the unitary authority to achieve this goal - again, sourced to this dubious column, and all brought in here with the weaselly "it has been suggested .." formulation, which just begs for a "by who?" tag.
- In November 2010, British Prime Minister David Cameron said that his government would "devolve a lot of power to Cornwall - that will go to the Cornish unitary authority - yes, a direct quote, and cited as such. But it's been plonked here as if Cameron is driving a political strategy that specifically is aiming for Cornish devolution, in the way that Blair did for Scotland, NI and Wales. But that isn't true - it's not clear that, in context, Cameron is saying anything more than that his government is looking to decentralise political power (as administrations often do), and that Cornwall Council, like any other local authority, will benefit from that. Is there a susbtantive, on-the-record official policy to give more power to the council spcifically, or is this just an off-the-cuff comment to a local paper? How much weight are we going to give this?
- Talks are currently under way between the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and a cross party group, including the six Cornish MPs, as to how to bring about the devolution of powers to Cornwall - this is a rather startling piece of exaggeration and sophistry, given the quotes actually being used to back it up. All the source cited actually says is that, in response to a request for a meeting, Clegg said he would be happy to have one, in a classic piece of politician committing to nothing much that's actually substantive. There is nothing to confirm that such talks are taking place; let alone that they are about how to bring devolution to Cornwall (as opposed to being simply about exploring whether/how some more powers might be devolved). And, further to the above point, this article makes clear that any such moves are more about the government's general push towards localism across England and the UK, not any specific commitment to Cornish devolution.