Talk:Labour Party proxy and undeclared donations (2007)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Labour Party proxy and undeclared donations (2007) 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

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Politics of the United Kingdom

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Candidate for deletion?

Although there is a tendency among lazy journalists to attach the suffix '-gate' to any story which is remotely scandalous, I wonder whether on this particular occasion the media really has referred to the present story as "Donorgate". I would argue that it has not become a popular name for it.

Perhaps I am in a minority in this view? If not, I would recommend deletion of this page.

Informed Owl 11:02, 3 December 2007 (UTC)Informed Owl[reply]

I agree that the "gate" thing is tired and stupid. We should only have an article called "donorgate" if the term is being widely used. If there is a better article on this subject it could be redirected there. --DanielRigal 12:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, most of the content of this article is a direct cut-and-paste from the David Abrahams (Labour party donor) article. Obviously, this is a problem - amongst other things, it violates GFDL attribution requirements. If this article is not drastically rewritten, it should probably be nominated for deletion. Terraxos 13:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, having started this, I don't actually know how to mark articles for deletion! Terraxos also makes a good point, so this should perhaps be done now. Informed Owl 18:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)Informed Owl[reply]

Actually, on second thoughts, I'm not sure this needs to be deleted - the duplicated material has been removed from the David Abrahams (Labour party donor) article, so we don't still have the same information in two places. In that case, I think this is acceptable - just so long as it's clear as it was originally forked from that article. Terraxos 20:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I created this page because there was no central record of all the ins and the put of the scandal, which meant that it was harder for wikipedia users to find all the info when they had to go trawling across the site. And yes, for ease I copied some text from the Abrahams site becasue I didnt have time to write new copy and I knew other faithful wikiusers would improve the page for me. I think this page is vital to documenting an extraordinary time in British politics. Mindstar (talk) 00:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still think it should be renamed as I have not heard the phrase "Donorgate" used at all. How about "Labour Party anonymous donor scandal (2007)"? I think that is more descriptive. "Donorgate" can become a redirect. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Poor title

The title urgently needs changing as it is POV and uninformative.--Lucy-marie (talk) 12:12, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]