Talk:2015 United Kingdom general election

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2015 United Kingdom general election article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 3 months

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Many of these questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning the Next United Kingdom general election.

To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Q1: Why have you listed the parties in this order in the infobox?

A1: An extensive process of discussion and narrowing-down of the available options culminated in this RfC, which concluded that the infobox should use the template {{Infobox election}}, and should display Labour, the Conservatives, the SNP and the Liberal Democrats. This should not be altered without altogether clear consensus on the talkpage.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

2015 United Kingdom general election was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 20, 2010	Articles for deletion	No consensus
October 31, 2015	Good article nominee	Not listed

A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on May 8, 2015.

Current status: Former good article nominee

Politics of the United Kingdom High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elections and Referendums

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

2010s High‑importance

	2010s portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s 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.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

May 3 to 9, 2015 (13th)

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Social media#Definition and classification|digital platforms]] The anchor (#Definition and classification) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Section on media coverage[edit]

I've added a section on media coverage of the election. There are lots of reliable sources on it and, as the media is considered to be 'importan[t] to democratic life' (IPPR report [2015], p. 30) and 'essential to democracy, and a democratic election is impossible without media' (ACE encyclopedia entry 'Media and elections'), I thought it would make a useful, interesting and important addition. I've also added two tables in the Endorsements section. The tables -- on which parties the main daily and Sunday newspapers endorsed -- are taken from the main article on endorsements during this election campaign. I've included them here because (1.), considering the importance of the media in democracy and the elections, I thought this would be useful and important to include directly in this article; and (2.), in my opinion, it makes the main part of the other article more readily available (whilst providing extra detail if people want to click through to the full article on endorsements), which makes this article read more easily without having to go to a different article (this is following the precedent of other sections of this article, which link to another, main article of the topic but also provide an overview/the most pertinent information: e.g., the sections on MPs not standing for re-election, Contesting political parties and candidates, Television debates, and Opinion polling). I hope these decisions and edits are OK. --Woofboy (talk) 23:19, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Party use of social media in campaigns[edit]

The 2015 election was expected to be the 'social media election' (see, e.g., C. Byrne, 'Getting Engaged? The Relationship between Traditional, New Media, and the Electorate during the 2015 UK General Election' (Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Nov. 2015)). It would be good to see information included in this article about the parties' use of social media in their campaigning, and about the public's use of social media, too. --Woofboy (talk) 23:20, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Carlisle principle[edit]

With this edit, I merged the text from the Carlisle principle article, which is now a redirect to the 'Constitutional affairs' section. Thanks, Amkilpatrick (talk) 15:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UKIP?[edit]

Not a fan of the party at all. But given that they won a significant amount of votes and played a visible role in the media coverage of this election surely they should be included in the infobox? Or at least in the infobox for 2015 United Kingdom general election in England? --Theimmortalgodemperor (talk) 03:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Continuing from some of the discussion held on a recent RfC inspired by the 2021 Canadian federal election's article's infobox, I think that UKIP certainly has crossed the threshold of noteworthiness to be included in the lead infobox for this article. AwesomeSaucer9 (talk) 22:39, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]