Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom: Difference between revisions
RGloucester (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Elboertjie (talk | contribs) →Neutrality check: Please check neutrality for: Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election |
||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
Anyone mind taking a look at [[United Kingdom Conservative-Liberal coalition government austerity programme]] and [[George Osborne]]? The former appears to be aiming to discredit Osborne's economic policy and the latter is currently reading like a hatchet job. Notably, both use [[:File:UK austerity GDP.png|this image]], which includes an apparently made-up GDP growth figure for Q1 2012 (we can tell that even if we don't know that the Q1 figure hasn't been released yet - it was added before Q1 was even over). I don't have time or knowledge to fix them, but it would be valuable to have some knowledgeable eyes on them from this WikiProject. Thanks, ''[[User:Kahastok|Kahastok]]'' <small>''[[User Talk:Kahastok|talk]]''</small> 18:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC) |
Anyone mind taking a look at [[United Kingdom Conservative-Liberal coalition government austerity programme]] and [[George Osborne]]? The former appears to be aiming to discredit Osborne's economic policy and the latter is currently reading like a hatchet job. Notably, both use [[:File:UK austerity GDP.png|this image]], which includes an apparently made-up GDP growth figure for Q1 2012 (we can tell that even if we don't know that the Q1 figure hasn't been released yet - it was added before Q1 was even over). I don't have time or knowledge to fix them, but it would be valuable to have some knowledgeable eyes on them from this WikiProject. Thanks, ''[[User:Kahastok|Kahastok]]'' <small>''[[User Talk:Kahastok|talk]]''</small> 18:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
Another neutrality check please at [[Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election]]. The page editors there keep on removing UKIP from the page even though the UKIP party is rated higher in opinion polls. Since that page is about opinion polls, it looks as if the editors of that page has either bias towards the Lib Dems party or a bias against the UKIP. Either way, that article is not neutral. Can someone please have a look at that please? Thank you. [[User:Elboertjie|The joyous one]] ([[User talk:Elboertjie|talk]]) 21:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Category discussion == |
== Category discussion == |
Revision as of 21:06, 20 May 2012
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Auto-archiving period: 40 days ![]() |
![]() | Politics of the United Kingdom Project‑class | ||||||
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom page. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Auto-archiving period: 40 days ![]() |
Portal
A new British politics portal has been created at Portal:British politics. Please assist in the maintenance of this portal! RGloucester (talk) 04:00, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Neutrality check
Anyone mind taking a look at United Kingdom Conservative-Liberal coalition government austerity programme and George Osborne? The former appears to be aiming to discredit Osborne's economic policy and the latter is currently reading like a hatchet job. Notably, both use this image, which includes an apparently made-up GDP growth figure for Q1 2012 (we can tell that even if we don't know that the Q1 figure hasn't been released yet - it was added before Q1 was even over). I don't have time or knowledge to fix them, but it would be valuable to have some knowledgeable eyes on them from this WikiProject. Thanks, Kahastok talk 18:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Another neutrality check please at Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election. The page editors there keep on removing UKIP from the page even though the UKIP party is rated higher in opinion polls. Since that page is about opinion polls, it looks as if the editors of that page has either bias towards the Lib Dems party or a bias against the UKIP. Either way, that article is not neutral. Can someone please have a look at that please? Thank you. The joyous one (talk) 21:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Category discussion
Your input requested here on a category dealing with British/Irish/Scottish/etc Unionism. Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_April_17#Category:Unionism--KarlB (talk) 17:33, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
This proposal relates to copyrights. Feel free to discuss. --George Ho (talk) 17:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
All-women shortlists
It has come to my attention that a large number of articles on MPs who were elected by all-women shortlists (perhaps all of them) contain the following text: X was selected to stand for Labour through an all-women shortlist.[1][2] This method of selection was subsequently declared illegal in January 1996 as it breached sex discrimination laws.[2] This identical text can be found in Anne Begg, Liz Blackman, Karen Buck, Maria Eagle, Fiona Mactaggart, Julie Morgan and at least two dozen others.
It is my view that containing this sentence in these articles is inherently POV and potentially raises WP:BLP issues, as it implies that these candidates are/were somehow not legitimately elected, or might not have been had an AWS not been used. Simply put, there is no need to undermine the legitimacy of these politicians by stating that all-women shortlists were declared illegal. It should be sufficient to say 'X was selected by all-women shortlist', and if the reader cares more about it they can read that article. I propose that the second sentence above be removed from all the biographies that contain it. Does anyone else have any comments? Robofish (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Sounds sensible; as you say, including the text like this does seem to suggest that the validity of their selection was thus put in doubt. Andrew Gray (talk) 19:45, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Seems reasonable to me. Rwendland (talk) 20:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Naming conventions
Please see this discussion about election article titles. Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 09:07, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
- ^ http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2001/rp01-075.pdf
- ^ a b Rentoul, John; Ward, Stephen; MacIntyre, Donald (9 January 1996). "Labour blow as all-women lists outlawed". The Independent. London.