Template talk:United Kingdom elections

2090:, but just to hint that ICONDECORATION usually discourages the repeated use of flags and to use them for purely decorative issues, something which is not done here. To point out, people that press for the removal of flags just keep pressing that those serve "no navigational function" without further arguing it, yet when in these discussions you find lots of people saying otherwise and that these do indeed help them to navigate/identify the topic of the page, the result always ends up the same. Unless you bring out a VERY strong reasoning to break such an established Knowledge common practice for elections, stop bringing out this issue again and again and again, because it's always the same and it always ends the same (specially if people will end up edit-warring over it). 149: 131: 913:(a) Again: These templates do not include speculative events. The next sets of general and local elections are not speculative events, as these have occured as scheduled for decades. On the other hand, the referendum may well never happen, as with the EU constitution one. Similarly we did not include the Scottish independence referendum in the Scottish template until it was actually called, even though we had an article long beforehand. (b) We have numerous articles on referendums that never happened and are not linked from these templates (because that's not what they are for, and (c) the fact that a few IPs (who are almost certainly unaware of the convention for what these templates do or do not include) does not mean there is consensus. 978:? Another problem with this template (probably resulting from the same kind of rule-imposing mentality) is that referendums of huge importance for the United Kingdom, particularly the Scottish independence referendum, do not appear except via an indirect "see also" link (presumably because they were held only in part of the UK, but why does that influence the likelihood of a reader's wanting to navigate to them? and in any case many of the local elections listed also covered only limited parts of the UK). 22: 71: 53: 2086:

specific political regime/historical period in which the election is taking place in such a country. I should also remind that the use of icons in election-related templates is common practice across several Wikis, with others also making use of this, so it's not just "one editor's opinion". I'm not going to (once again) state all of my views on this, so I'll just refer back to my own arguments

900:

and the italics and word "proposed" differentiate it sufficiently from the polls that have in fact taken place. I don't see any practical arguments at all in favor of removing this link, and several other editors have also felt it worth adding, with only you removing it each time. Please defend your position or respect the apparent consensus.

1629:"referendums" line to include information about what the referendums were about, which is obviously much more meaningful to people than the years in which they took/will take place. What on earth is the point of deleting that information? If the only reason is "to conform to a standard", then I suggest that this is no reason at all. 1214:. Alright, it will have to be in the next five years and there is legislation to do with the timing and the election. But it hasn't been called and we don't know when it will happen. Same with the EU referendum, we know it will take place before the end of 2017. So should we remove the next general election from the template? 2085:

Oh, please, again? This has been discussed many and many times and in any of them the choice to remove them won it through. Project-wide consensus is actually to keep them in, because they're not merely a decorative but serve a navigational purpose by helping identificate the specific country AND the

1562:

It's not appropriate because the government could announce the date of this vote at very short notice (1 month), yet we have known since May that this referendum is practically certain to happen at some point before the end of 2017. It does not make sense to withhold this information when there is no

1415:

More reasonable in my view would be to include those for which we have articles (i.e. which are notable by Knowledge standards). If there are too many of these (which I doubt) then we can use our common sense to decide which will be of significant interest to readers. It seems extremely detached from

1234:

We know the next election will happen, and we almost always have the next election listed (as we also do for the next local and European elections) as they are regularly scheduled events. Apart from in Switzerland, referendums are irregular one-off events and as such we only list them when they are a

1084:

But if it is linked using the word "Proposed", then they won't be misled in that way, just as they aren't misled by the "Next" link that we already have. And how are they helped by our omitting the links to the devolution and independence referendums? Those were also "in the UK", and very significant

992:

It was probably decided in a talk page discussion like this earky on in their history, but as there are hundreds of these templates, it's difficult to know where. Same goes for the convention on only including national-level elections/referendums. Local elections are a different kettle of fish and it

899:

might be looking for this article, the navbox will help them to find it. Omitting it from the navbox (while including other future elections) might even imply that we don't have such an article, and discourage people from looking for it. There is plenty of space in the relevant section of the navbox,

853:

I don't understand the editor who keeps removing the link to the article on the proposed referendum - we already have links to some future elections on the template, and what is the point in obstructing readers who might want to find the article on this topic, particularly since it's not obvious what

295:

Hi BHG. I've removed the non UK-wide referendums from this template, on the basis that (a) they are already on the Scottish/Welsh/N Irish templates, and (b) if we start including referendums in England, then we could fill the template a million times over with local referendums on all kinds of things

1514:

Waiting until a fixed date for the referendum is not appropriate. Until the fixed term parliament act was introduced, we had no idea on what date the next UK general election would be called (e.g. the notion in 2007 that Gordon Brown would call a snap election, which eventually came to nothing). All

342:

referendums affected the status of the UK as a whole, even though polling was restricted to one part of it. Whether regionalising the referendums was a good or bad idea is a a wholly POV issue, but in each case there were demands that a referendum affecting either the borders of the UK (as in Norrn

1472:

I really don't understand the justification for removing this. Sure, there is a possibility that the referendum won't happen, but it is highly unlikely. Almost as highly unlikely as the next election not happening. If there is a non-negligible chance of the referendum not happening, why are various

934:

You just assert that such a convention exists. Why do you think it exists anywhere outside your own mind? And if it does exist, what is the point of it? Why are you so sure that readers do not want to read our article about a ("speculative") event that is currently all over the newspapers? Are you

1828:

For me, they do serve a navigational function as they're a useful visual cue. I'm sure John will just state the same thing he does every time we have this conversation, so how to you propose to actually reach a consensus as to whether their use is prohibited or not other than bludgeoning with the

1338:

the date being set should be the criterion for inclusion in this template. These templates serve no function other than to help people to navigate articles of interest - what is the point of deliberately making them less helpful by excluding articles that we know are of much greater interest than

1628:

is trying to impose some pointless "standard" on the template, by edit-warring against others who want to make a simple change that obviously improves its usefulness. Is there any chance we can settle this trivial matter without another unnecessarily long argument? There is plenty of room in the

335:

European election and the local elections. The best solution would be to have a an articles/lists on "local elections in Scotland", "local elections in England", "local elections in Wales" etc and link to those ... but if those articles don't exist yet, it's better to have some links than none.

334:

I can see a case for removing the council elections, in that they are organised separately in the various constituent countries. But the solution should not be to entirely remove them from the template: that way there is no obvious path between (for example) an article on a general election or

973:

That just sounds like "I own these templates, so what I say goes." When was it agreed by anyone other than yourself that "scheduled" future elections (whatever that precisely means) should appear, but "speculative" ones should not? And even if it was, given the huge amount of interest in this

1722:

prohibits their use on these templates. The argument by the removers is that they are decoration; the counterargument is that they are visual cues (which are explicitly allowed under the guideline) as some articles have more than one navigation template on them and it helps identify which

1648:

is not edit warring. The template is a simple navigation template for displaying years of elections and referendums. It is far better to keep it simple – not everything has to be explained on the template. I hope you will appreciate that consistency is also a key facet of Knowledge.

894:

Why? People are writing about it, we have an article about it, readers are likely to want to read about it (far more likely than to want to read about most of the other elections listed here). So what if it doesn't happen? So what if the 2016 local elections don't happen? People

2048:(a) they do serve a navigational purpose and as such (b) don't breach ICONDECORATION or any other project-wide consensus. It's also not just my opinion – the reason other discussions ended in no consensus is because there were other editors in favour of retaining them. I invite 1608:

I too think we should include the planned EU referendum. No one will be confused into thinking that the referendum has actually been called if we qualify the link by stating that the EU referendum is proposed or planned. Nothing is ever definite until after it's happened. —

305:

Also, I'm not sure why you changed it from British to UK - last time I checked, "British" was the demonym for all the UK, not just the mainland (as much as some people in Northern Ireland don't like it, it's still the case). However, I'm not going to bother reverting that.

343:

Iron) or the powers of its parliament (as in Scotland and Wales) should have been decided by a UK-wide vote. By omitting the NI/Scots/Welsh referendums, we are taking a view on whether there were any wider implications, and the endless parliamentary debates over the

2116:

that Knowledge uses disqualifies you from being taken seriously here. I propose a further discussion. Let's see where and how we think it can best be taken forwards. For those who spit on consensus and who edit war there are always behavioural sanctions available.

576:

quite properly reverted my edits to the template; I had, embarrassingly, missed the 1975 entry. However, the reason I removed the markup on 2011 was because "Further Welsh powers" wasn't italicized. Shouldn't the markup usage be consistent across the two entries?

951:

I am aware of the convention because I have been involved in in editing these templates for 8-9 years. One reason for being so is that Iam keen for people to navigate between articles on actual elections and referendums. However, this is not one yet.

993:

would be difficult to segregate them given the amount of overlap between which parts of the country they are held in. More importantly, all the articles are titled "United Kingdom local elections", so it is appropriate that they are listed here.

491:) list those articles applicable to both Great Britain and the UK. I think it would be helpful and appropriate to add pre-1800 elections here, especially given the separation between the UK and Great Britain is clearly indicated. -- 231:

I'm inclined to agree, and I'm the one who created made it, even though I wasn't logged in. I'm super busy -- perhaps you could fix it. Just don't make me add links to it in every uk election year article again! That'd be torture;)

1592:

does not set a date for the referendum. When it becomes law, we still won't have a set date for the referendum. That will only happen when the government calls the referendum under the provisions of the bill (act at that point).

1717:

Disappointing to see the flagicon has become an issue again. As noted in the edit summaries, we've had several discussions elsewhere about their use on these templates previously and they have never resulted in a consensus that

506:

I think you are misrepresenting the Ireland point - the UK was the same country before and after 1922, albeit with a change in name and territory - it was not a new country like the 1802 merger of the Kingdoms of GB and Ireland

1353:

I have explained this multiple times, but let's try again: Referendums should be included only when they are definitely going to happen, not when they are simply proposals. A date being set means it's actually going to happen.

1393:

We need to have some kind of cut-off point. There are numerous proposed referendums, but many of them never happen. As a result, I think it's reasonable that we only include links to referendums that are actually going ahead.

513:

Basically, I think things are fine as they are, although a good suggestion may be to add "Kingdom of Great Britain" and "Kingdom of Ireland" to the bottom bar where the links to elections in N Ireland, Scotland and Wales are.

296:(like elected mayors, tax proposals etc etc); I think it is best for local elections (ones held only for a specific locality, as opposed to local elections held across the country) should be on their own templates (e.g. 1488:

Because we don't add referendums until a date is confirmed. Elections come in cycles; with the exception of Switzerland, referendums do not. I can't understand why editors are not willing to be patient or respect BRD.

1670:

Adding obviously helpful information in a place where there is obviously plenty of room for it is not in any way contradictory to "keeping it simple". In what way will any reader be helped by the removal of this?

1685:

I don't see why the addition of the words is "obviously helpful" as hovering over the links shows the title of the article anyway. Knowledge needs to have a consistent layout and this is part of that process.

2110:

MOS:FLAG was written by a small group of MOS fanatics and has little support outside of the clique of about six editors who try and enforce it. It is widely ignored, usually to the benefit of Knowledge

1430:

I don't think anyone is claiming that it isn't of interest, but if you need to resort to making false claims to further your argument, then I don't really see the point in continuing to debate this.

219:

I changed how elections held in the same year are indicated - "1974 A" and "1974 B" don't make much sense on their own, so I wrote them to include the abbreviated month. Also I changed the title to

1141:

happen (even though a date hasn't been determined), there has been a bill passed in parliament for the referendum to take place and there are already campaigning groups formed to take the official

1909:

Actually I found it quite helpful to easily identify the national identity of each school. Perhaps you're a words guy and I'm an images guy. But also, it's nothing like what we have here.

1014:

I'm still not seeing any arguments, nor can I conceive of any, as to how or why readers are supposed to be helped by our omitting these potentially high-interest links. Can you give some?

1416:

reality to claim that this proposed EU referendum is of no great interest, compared with many of the other articles (many of which don't yet even exist) that are listed on this template.

2030:. One editor's opinion that they look nice should not be able to outweigh project-wide consensus. There are also concerns with anachronism, nationalism and how this plays into UNDUE. -- 670:. Really, the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish referendums should not be on here either as they are not national across the UK, and are on the relevant templates for those countries. 510:

Also, if you insist on adding pre-1802 elections for GB to this template, pre-1802 elections for Ireland should also be added, which I think would make the template a little unwieldy.

241:

I don't want to have to go through every article either, I'm sure someone can do it fairly quickly with a bot. It's not an urgent task, I'll ask around after the election is over...

1182:

I still disagree. Let's wait until it's officially called – then we'll also have a date to use in the template. As is clear, it's still a proposed referendum, not an actual one.

869:

Future elections will almost certainly happen. There is no guarantee the referendum will (hence the inclusion of "proposed" in its title) - it may end up being like the proposed

2274: 1310: 2279: 1515:

you need is a high level of certainty that the event is going to happen. I think that point was crossed for this referendum when the Tories won an overall majority in May.

418:

The below is a great idea: now done. That allows access to the Scottish Parliament and Welsh assembly elections, and local elections are probably best covered that way.

2264: 1613: 1997:

I think you're clutching at straws a bit here – the vast majority of election articles don't have other navboxes, and even so, claiming undue is a bit of a stretch.

350:

So I will now reinstate the Scots/Welsh/N.Ireland referendums. However, maybe it might help to subdivide the referendums list into UK-wide/Scots/Welsh/N.Ireland. --

165: 1734:

Anyway, I'm happy to have yet another RfC (I believe at least two of the discussions previously were also RfCs) if there is an insistence that they are decoration.

1149:

positions during the referendum. There has been lots of media attention about this referendum and I can't see David Cameron not going ahead with this referendum (a

1864:

I understand that you feel that way, but I hope you understand that I disagree because I find them useful visual cues, which are an acceptable use of these icons.

2269: 2217:

I don't think so. Elections are regularly postponed around the world (including many due to covid), and we just link to the year they actually happened. Cheers,

1785: 839: 825: 541: 327:

The reason for the renaming was simple: why use a contentious adjective when we can just as easily use the noun which is both accurate and uncontested? And be

1576: 1545: 1524: 1505: 779:

Sorry, this looks awful. Why should this template be any different to the standard navbox format that almost all other election templates are formatted with?

438: 413: 367: 530: 156: 136: 2013: 1823: 1285:

it would happen) but it is going to happen, and if it is going to happen, then surely it should be included to help the reader navigate between articles?

795: 2180: 1724: 1702: 1680: 1665: 1446: 1425: 1410: 1388: 1370: 1348: 1329: 1300: 1251: 1229: 1198: 1094: 1079: 1058: 1044: 1023: 1009: 987: 968: 944: 889: 806: 1992: 1964: 1943: 1925: 1904: 1880: 1859: 1845: 1801: 1779: 929: 459:

but this was reverted. The reason given for the reversion was Great Britain and United Kingdom are not the same country. This is correct, however the

2247: 2233: 397:

Also, I don't have a problem with the local election links being on here as they are (the "local" thing was largely aimed at the referendums issue).

2162: 2126: 2080: 2039: 745: 731: 700: 686: 608: 1602: 1482: 592:

Yes. Although, TBH, I am somewhat wary of the Welsh one, because although it is part of the government programme, a date still hasn't been set...

2099: 1638: 870: 96: 78: 58: 2176: 802: 475: 661: 455:

I would like to propose adding the elections to the Parliament of Great Britain (the British general elections of 1707-1800). I have previous

338:

As to referendums, I take your point about purely local referendums, such as the mayoral referendums. But the devolution referendums and the

1176: 863: 223:

since this template seems to be about general rather than any other kind of election. Maybe this template should be renamed to reflect this?

691:

Thanks for talking. Perhaps we could remove them and create a devolution template? The NEE and London referendums are part of that process.

1728: 500: 460: 273: 2026:

Thanks for pinging me. The flags are just clutter and should be removed. They serve no navigational or encyclopedic purpose and breach

620: 2135:

Ignoring guidelines where they prevent editors improving Knowledge is an official Knowledge policy, and therefore trumps guidelines –

843: 829: 586: 1889: 2184: 322: 236: 773: 632: 1306: 485: 433: 362: 268: 1850:

They do not help you navigate to an article, therefore they have no purpose here. I feel the same way about images too. --

1750: 810: 388: 2238:

Fair enough - I think anyone looking would work out what happened fairly easily from the 2021 article in any case. Thanks

288: 2199: 2195: 2087: 421:

But per my comments above, the devolution and border referendums do belong in there too, so I will reinstate them now. --

373: 2211: 1619: 2194:

Would it be worth putting a note to say that there were local elections scheduled for 2020, but these were cancelled.

835: 821: 220: 2228: 2157: 2075: 2008: 1959: 1920: 1875: 1840: 1774: 1745: 1697: 1660: 1540: 1500: 1441: 1405: 1365: 1324: 1246: 1193: 1074: 1039: 1004: 963: 924: 884: 790: 726: 681: 649: 603: 525: 408: 317: 148: 130: 550:

Oppose, same reason as 57 above. They're different countries and the elections were to different institutions (

1278:

The one thing we know for sure is that Prime Minister David Cameron has said it will happen by the end of 2017.

848: 456: 204: 161: 1210:

But what about the next general election? That date isn't set, yet it is still in the template with the text

1784:

Flags serve no navigational function, so therefore do not belong in a navbox. They are just clutter. See

1589: 568: 33: 384:, so links to the templates for the devolved nations appear on the template, similar to the bottom bar on 1529:

Why is it not appropriate? For unknown election dates, we add them as "next"; they still come in cycles.

377: 2139:. But this is a distraction from this particular discussion as the guideline isn't being ignored here. 1598: 1572: 1520: 1478: 709: 429: 358: 297: 284: 264: 2027: 1789: 496: 381: 347:

suggest that is a highly partisan position. Inclusion leaves the reader to make up their own minds.

256:

I have just added council elections (insofar as we have articles on them) and more referendums. --

164:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1610: 935:

here to help people navigate Knowledge, or just to enforce rules of your own arbitrary choosing?

2170: 614: 450: 331:

careful about using the term "mainland" in this context, unless you have a flame-proof suit on.

82:, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to 1028:

Because this is a template for actual events, not proposed events or ones that didn't happen.

815: 769: 559: 344: 39: 1049:

The question was how readers are going to be helped by our omitting the links. Any answers?

1983:

as it will attract more attention than other equally important navboxes on the article. --

1676: 1634: 1594: 1568: 1516: 1474: 1421: 1384: 1344: 1294: 1223: 1170: 1090: 1054: 1019: 983: 940: 905: 859: 422: 351: 257: 251: 214: 1305:

Once a date has been set, I'll be happy to include it. The article is linked to from both

8: 2223: 2152: 2070: 2003: 1988: 1954: 1939: 1915: 1900: 1870: 1855: 1835: 1819: 1797: 1769: 1740: 1692: 1655: 1535: 1495: 1436: 1400: 1360: 1319: 1241: 1188: 1069: 1034: 999: 958: 919: 879: 785: 721: 676: 643: 598: 520: 492: 403: 312: 2059: 536: 2095: 1931: 1719: 1564: 2243: 2207: 2143: 765: 90: 2108:

Thanks for linking to that earlier discussion. I stopped reading it when I got to

1268: 873:, which never happened. Wait until it's been confirmed, and then it can be added. 1980: 1786:

Knowledge:Navigation template#Navigation templates are not arbitrarily decorative

1672: 1630: 1417: 1380: 1340: 1287: 1216: 1163: 1128: 1086: 1050: 1015: 979: 936: 901: 855: 759: 666:

I made my comments in the edit summary section. The list you refer to is clearly

2218: 2147: 2122: 2112:. Expressing contempt for the Manual of Style and for the guiding principle of 2065: 2035: 1998: 1984: 1949: 1935: 1910: 1896: 1865: 1851: 1830: 1815: 1793: 1764: 1758: 1735: 1731:(there are many more examples, this is just a couple to illustrate the point). 1687: 1650: 1625: 1530: 1490: 1431: 1395: 1355: 1314: 1258: 1236: 1205: 1183: 1137:

just seen this, but I do believe that this should be included. This referendum

1132: 1064: 1029: 994: 953: 914: 874: 780: 741: 716: 696: 671: 657: 639: 628: 593: 582: 573: 515: 464: 398: 307: 280: 233: 820:

Should the template be updated to include a link to the recent PCC elections?

208: 2258: 2136: 2113: 2055: 1712: 1645: 975: 736:

I can definitely see the value in keeping the devolution stuff in one place.

94:

and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit

764:

I updated this template with a new look. It should be more presentable now.

2202:

so I am not sure if it would be helpful to have it in the template or not.

2189: 2091: 2051: 667: 2239: 2203: 1723:

country/body the election is to (see e.g. the templates at the bottom of

242: 224: 974:

particular speculative referendum, isn't this an obvious case where the

70: 52: 339: 1085:

for the UK, so it seems only natural for users to look for them here.

1063:

Because they won't be misled into thinking it's an actual referendum.

2118: 2031: 1809: 737: 692: 653: 624: 578: 2142:

If we want yet another discussion on this, I propose another RfC at

2146:

as it's the most relevant WikiProject for this to be discussed at.

1763:

Could you join this discussion rather than keep reverting? Thanks.

1563:

substantial reason to believe that the referendum will not happen (

558:, as it has remained since 1801 despite the partition of Ireland). 84: 1473:

campaign organisations (Vote Leave, Leave.EU, BSE) being formed?

1311:

United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum, 1975

471:

but pre-1922 elections are listed here. Also, other templates (

2175:

When did Akhumzi did his grade 12 at Winile secondary school?

1267:

going to happen; see this BBC News article from 5 days ago,

1379:

you think that this should be the criterion for inclusion.

372:

How about adding the |below = Elections and referendums in

1644:

Reverting two separate users and asking people to respect

1979:

Oh, also, a navbox with a flag in its header also fails

1624:

This is basically the same situation as above, I think.

834:

Nevermind, I just saw why this had been removed before.

198: 1313:, and can be easily found through the search function. 2275:

Template-Class Politics of the United Kingdom articles

2280:

NA-importance Politics of the United Kingdom articles

705:

Possibly, although the London one already exists on

174:

Knowledge:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom

160:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 621:

Referendums in the United Kingdom#Major referendums

177:

Template:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom

2265:Template-Class Elections and Referendums articles 1588:A further point to note in this case is that the 619:Probably a good idea for this template to repeat 2256: 1269:A guide to the UK's planned in-out EU referendum 871:United Kingdom European Constitution referendum 715:, so I'm not sure whether one would be useful. 106:Knowledge:WikiProject Elections and Referendums 2270:WikiProject Elections and Referendums articles 801:What is it that is unique with this template? 109:Template:WikiProject Elections and Referendums 461:United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland 157:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom 32:does not require a rating on Knowledge's 1930:But it completely fails every aspect of 180:Politics of the United Kingdom articles 2257: 652:) be drawn into a discussion on this? 1339:many of the articles that do appear? 1307:United Kingdom general election, 2015 623:rather than have different criteria. 476:Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom 457:added these elections to the template 209:Category: UK General Election results 154:This template is within the scope of 79:WikiProject Elections and Referendums 76:This template is within the scope of 21: 19: 1948:But it doesn't – visual cues again. 465:United Kingdom of Great Britain and 15: 2200:2021 United Kingdom local elections 2196:2020 United Kingdom local elections 1153:u-turn). What could be inserted is 38:It is of interest to the following 13: 112:Elections and Referendums articles 14: 2291: 203:I created this template from the 1829:same thing over and over again? 1235:reality rather than a proposal. 556:Parliament of the United Kingdom 221:United Kingdom general elections 147: 129: 69: 51: 20: 1890:International schools in Taiwan 1334:Still you give no reason as to 463:is not the same country as the 908:) 08:30, 5 Augukst 2015 (UTC) 746:11:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC) 732:10:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC) 701:09:54, 24 September 2010 (UTC) 687:08:09, 24 September 2010 (UTC) 662:05:26, 24 September 2010 (UTC) 633:18:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC) 205:template:New Zealand elections 171:Politics of the United Kingdom 162:Politics of the United Kingdom 137:Politics of the United Kingdom 1: 2248:23:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC) 2234:00:10, 29 November 2021 (UTC) 2212:23:54, 28 November 2021 (UTC) 1703:09:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC) 1681:08:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC) 1666:14:12, 24 February 2016 (UTC) 1639:12:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC) 844:11:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC) 830:11:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC) 168:and see a list of open tasks. 1614:11:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC) 1603:11:32, 22 October 2015 (UTC) 1577:11:30, 22 October 2015 (UTC) 1546:11:24, 22 October 2015 (UTC) 1525:11:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC) 1506:11:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC) 1483:11:18, 22 October 2015 (UTC) 1447:22:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC) 1426:11:34, 19 October 2015 (UTC) 1411:18:45, 18 October 2015 (UTC) 1389:10:53, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 1371:10:20, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 1349:06:49, 17 October 2015 (UTC) 1330:23:22, 16 October 2015 (UTC) 1301:22:20, 16 October 2015 (UTC) 1252:22:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC) 1230:22:05, 16 October 2015 (UTC) 1199:22:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC) 1177:21:54, 16 October 2015 (UTC) 486:Chancellors of the Exchequer 7: 2088:last time we discussed this 1095:18:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC) 552:Parliament of Great Britain 389:U.S. presidential elections 10: 2296: 1620:Explaining the referendums 1080:08:56, 9 August 2015 (UTC) 1059:16:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC) 1045:15:49, 8 August 2015 (UTC) 1024:10:18, 8 August 2015 (UTC) 1010:14:15, 7 August 2015 (UTC) 988:08:10, 7 August 2015 (UTC) 969:23:22, 6 August 2015 (UTC) 945:07:10, 6 August 2015 (UTC) 930:08:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC) 890:13:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC) 864:11:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC) 542:23:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC) 531:12:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC) 501:12:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC) 439:02:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC) 414:01:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC) 368:01:20, 14 March 2009 (UTC) 323:13:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC) 274:19:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC) 2163:14:34, 24 June 2017 (UTC) 2127:13:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC) 2100:22:13, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 2081:21:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 2040:19:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 2014:16:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1993:15:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1965:16:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1944:15:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1926:15:19, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1905:15:13, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1881:15:02, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1860:14:57, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1846:14:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1824:14:44, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1802:14:44, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1780:14:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1751:14:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC) 1161:section of the template. 609:19:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC) 587:15:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC) 535:I agree with Number 57. — 298:Template:London elections 285:User talk:BrownHairedGirl 227:00:23, May 5, 2005 (UTC) 142: 103:Elections and Referendums 64: 59:Elections and Referendums 46: 1281:. (Alright, he did just 796:08:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 774:01:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC) 245:11:08, May 5, 2005 (UTC) 2185:16:06, 5 May 2018 (UTC) 811:16:04, 5 May 2018 (UTC) 562:15:38, 4 May 2009 (UTC) 237:07:22, 5 May 2005 (UTC) 1271:. This reads as if it 976:rule should be ignored 849:Proposed EU referendum 345:West Lothian Question 207:using the years from 2064:to add their views. 1725:EU election articles 854:its title would be? 569:Further Welsh powers 1155:Proposed referendum 1611:Blue-Haired Lawyer 1273:is going to happen 1263:The referendum is 34:content assessment 2198:is a redirect to 2028:WP:ICONDECORATION 1790:WP:ICONDECORATION 1265:almost definitely 437: 366: 279:comment below by 272: 196: 195: 192: 191: 188: 187: 124: 123: 120: 119: 2287: 2231: 2226: 2221: 2160: 2155: 2150: 2078: 2073: 2068: 2063: 2011: 2006: 2001: 1962: 1957: 1952: 1923: 1918: 1913: 1894: 1888: 1878: 1873: 1868: 1843: 1838: 1833: 1813: 1777: 1772: 1767: 1762: 1748: 1743: 1738: 1729:2004 Cypriot one 1700: 1695: 1690: 1663: 1658: 1653: 1543: 1538: 1533: 1503: 1498: 1493: 1444: 1439: 1434: 1408: 1403: 1398: 1375:The question is 1368: 1363: 1358: 1327: 1322: 1317: 1299: 1291: 1262: 1249: 1244: 1239: 1228: 1220: 1209: 1196: 1191: 1186: 1175: 1167: 1136: 1077: 1072: 1067: 1042: 1037: 1032: 1007: 1002: 997: 966: 961: 956: 927: 922: 917: 887: 882: 877: 793: 788: 783: 729: 724: 719: 714: 710:London elections 708: 684: 679: 674: 606: 601: 596: 539: 528: 523: 518: 490: 484: 480: 474: 428: 425: 411: 406: 401: 393: 387: 374:Northern Ireland 357: 354: 320: 315: 310: 289:initially posted 263: 260: 182: 181: 178: 175: 172: 151: 144: 143: 133: 126: 125: 114: 113: 110: 107: 104: 97:our project page 91:electoral reform 73: 66: 65: 55: 48: 47: 25: 24: 23: 16: 2295: 2294: 2290: 2289: 2288: 2286: 2285: 2284: 2255: 2254: 2229: 2224: 2219: 2192: 2173: 2158: 2153: 2148: 2076: 2071: 2066: 2049: 2009: 2004: 1999: 1960: 1955: 1950: 1921: 1916: 1911: 1895:? Clutter. -- 1892: 1886: 1876: 1871: 1866: 1841: 1836: 1831: 1807: 1775: 1770: 1765: 1756: 1746: 1741: 1736: 1715: 1698: 1693: 1688: 1661: 1656: 1651: 1622: 1595:Jmorrison230582 1569:Jmorrison230582 1541: 1536: 1531: 1517:Jmorrison230582 1501: 1496: 1491: 1475:Jmorrison230582 1442: 1437: 1432: 1406: 1401: 1396: 1366: 1361: 1356: 1325: 1320: 1315: 1289: 1286: 1275:, it says that 1256: 1247: 1242: 1237: 1218: 1215: 1203: 1194: 1189: 1184: 1165: 1162: 1126: 1075: 1070: 1065: 1040: 1035: 1030: 1005: 1000: 995: 964: 959: 954: 925: 920: 915: 885: 880: 875: 851: 818: 791: 786: 781: 762: 727: 722: 717: 712: 706: 682: 677: 672: 617: 604: 599: 594: 571: 537: 526: 521: 516: 488: 482: 478: 472: 453: 423: 409: 404: 399: 391: 385: 352: 318: 313: 308: 287:, where it was 258: 254: 217: 201: 179: 176: 173: 170: 169: 111: 108: 105: 102: 101: 12: 11: 5: 2293: 2283: 2282: 2277: 2272: 2267: 2253: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2191: 2188: 2172: 2171:Akhumzi jezile 2169: 2168: 2167: 2166: 2165: 2140: 2130: 2129: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2083: 2043: 2042: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2016: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1804: 1782: 1714: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1626:User:Number 57 1621: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1509: 1508: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1097: 850: 847: 817: 814: 799: 798: 761: 758: 757: 756: 755: 754: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 748: 616: 615:Sync with list 613: 612: 611: 570: 567: 566: 565: 564: 563: 545: 544: 533: 511: 508: 493:Philip Stevens 452: 451:Merge proposal 449: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 443: 442: 441: 419: 395: 348: 336: 332: 302: 301: 281:User:Number 57 253: 250: 249: 248: 247: 246: 216: 213: 200: 197: 194: 193: 190: 189: 186: 185: 183: 166:the discussion 152: 140: 139: 134: 122: 121: 118: 117: 115: 74: 62: 61: 56: 44: 43: 37: 26: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2292: 2281: 2278: 2276: 2273: 2271: 2268: 2266: 2263: 2262: 2260: 2249: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2232: 2227: 2222: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2209: 2205: 2201: 2197: 2187: 2186: 2182: 2178: 2164: 2161: 2156: 2151: 2145: 2141: 2138: 2134: 2133: 2132: 2131: 2128: 2124: 2120: 2115: 2111: 2107: 2106: 2101: 2097: 2093: 2089: 2084: 2082: 2079: 2074: 2069: 2061: 2060:Nightstallion 2057: 2053: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2024: 2015: 2012: 2007: 2002: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1978: 1966: 1963: 1958: 1953: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1924: 1919: 1914: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1902: 1898: 1891: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1879: 1874: 1869: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1844: 1839: 1834: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1821: 1817: 1811: 1806:Also pinging 1805: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1791: 1787: 1783: 1781: 1778: 1773: 1768: 1760: 1755: 1754: 1753: 1752: 1749: 1744: 1739: 1732: 1730: 1726: 1721: 1704: 1701: 1696: 1691: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1678: 1674: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1664: 1659: 1654: 1647: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1636: 1632: 1627: 1615: 1612: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1600: 1596: 1591: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1566: 1561: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1556: 1555: 1554: 1547: 1544: 1539: 1534: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1513: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1507: 1504: 1499: 1494: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1448: 1445: 1440: 1435: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1409: 1404: 1399: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1378: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1369: 1364: 1359: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1337: 1333: 1332: 1331: 1328: 1323: 1318: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1298: 1297: 1293: 1292: 1284: 1280: 1279: 1274: 1270: 1266: 1260: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1250: 1245: 1240: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1227: 1226: 1222: 1221: 1213: 1207: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1197: 1192: 1187: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1174: 1173: 1169: 1168: 1160: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1144: 1140: 1134: 1130: 1096: 1092: 1088: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1078: 1073: 1068: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1056: 1052: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1043: 1038: 1033: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1021: 1017: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1008: 1003: 998: 991: 990: 989: 985: 981: 977: 972: 971: 970: 967: 962: 957: 950: 949: 948: 947: 946: 942: 938: 933: 932: 931: 928: 923: 918: 912: 911: 910: 909: 907: 903: 898: 893: 892: 891: 888: 883: 878: 872: 868: 867: 866: 865: 861: 857: 846: 845: 841: 837: 832: 831: 827: 823: 816:PCC elections 813: 812: 808: 804: 797: 794: 789: 784: 778: 777: 776: 775: 771: 767: 747: 743: 739: 735: 734: 733: 730: 725: 720: 711: 704: 703: 702: 698: 694: 690: 689: 688: 685: 680: 675: 669: 665: 664: 663: 659: 655: 651: 648: 645: 641: 637: 636: 635: 634: 630: 626: 622: 610: 607: 602: 597: 591: 590: 589: 588: 584: 580: 575: 561: 557: 553: 549: 548: 547: 546: 543: 540: 538:Nightstallion 534: 532: 529: 524: 519: 512: 509: 505: 504: 503: 502: 498: 494: 487: 477: 470: 468: 462: 458: 440: 435: 431: 427: 420: 417: 416: 415: 412: 407: 402: 396: 390: 383: 379: 375: 371: 370: 369: 364: 360: 356: 349: 346: 341: 337: 333: 330: 326: 325: 324: 321: 316: 311: 304: 303: 299: 294: 293: 292: 291: 290: 286: 282: 276: 275: 270: 266: 262: 244: 240: 239: 238: 235: 230: 229: 228: 226: 222: 212: 210: 206: 184: 167: 163: 159: 158: 153: 150: 146: 145: 141: 138: 135: 132: 128: 127: 116: 99: 98: 93: 92: 87: 86: 81: 80: 75: 72: 68: 67: 63: 60: 57: 54: 50: 49: 45: 41: 35: 31: 27: 18: 17: 2193: 2174: 2109: 1733: 1716: 1623: 1587: 1471: 1376: 1335: 1295: 1288: 1282: 1277: 1276: 1272: 1264: 1224: 1217: 1211: 1171: 1164: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1146: 1142: 1138: 1125: 896: 852: 833: 819: 800: 763: 646: 618: 572: 555: 551: 466: 454: 328: 278: 277: 255: 252:More entries 218: 215:Rename this? 211:--Zantastik 202: 155: 95: 89: 83: 77: 40:WikiProjects 29: 1885:What about 1290:Seagull123 1219:Seagull123 1166:Seagull123 836:82.22.71.26 822:82.22.71.26 766:RGloucester 283:moved from 2259:Categories 2144:WP:E&R 1985:Rob Sinden 1936:Rob Sinden 1932:WP:MOSFLAG 1897:Rob Sinden 1852:Rob Sinden 1816:Rob Sinden 1794:Rob Sinden 1720:WP:MOSFLAG 1673:W. P. Uzer 1631:W. P. Uzer 1590:draft bill 1565:WP:CRYSTAL 1418:W. P. Uzer 1381:W. P. Uzer 1341:W. P. Uzer 1159:Referendum 1129:W. P. Uzer 1087:W. P. Uzer 1051:W. P. Uzer 1016:W. P. Uzer 980:W. P. Uzer 937:W. P. Uzer 902:W. P. Uzer 856:W. P. Uzer 426:HairedGirl 355:HairedGirl 340:Norrn Iron 261:HairedGirl 2114:consensus 1759:Robsinden 1259:Number 57 1206:Number 57 1133:Number 57 640:Number 57 574:Number 57 234:Zantastik 85:elections 2056:SPQRobin 1981:WP:UNDUE 650:contribs 507:created. 467:Northern 434:contribs 378:Scotland 363:contribs 269:contribs 30:template 2177:ZEEnhle 2092:Impru20 2058:, and 2052:Impru20 1727:or the 1157:in the 1151:massive 803:ZEEnhle 760:Updated 469:Ireland 199:Created 2240:Dunarc 2220:Number 2204:Dunarc 2149:Number 2137:WP:IAR 2067:Number 2000:Number 1951:Number 1912:Number 1867:Number 1832:Number 1766:Number 1737:Number 1689:Number 1652:Number 1646:WP:BRD 1532:Number 1492:Number 1433:Number 1397:Number 1357:Number 1316:Number 1238:Number 1185:Number 1066:Number 1031:Number 996:Number 955:Number 916:Number 876:Number 782:Number 718:пﮟოьεԻ 673:пﮟოьεԻ 595:пﮟოьεԻ 560:Bastin 517:пﮟოьεԻ 430:(talk) 400:пﮟოьεԻ 359:(talk) 309:пﮟოьεԻ 265:(talk) 243:Qwghlm 225:Qwghlm 36:scale. 1934:. -- 1814:. -- 1792:. -- 1713:Flags 668:WP:OR 424:Brown 382:Wales 353:Brown 259:Brown 28:This 2244:talk 2208:talk 2190:2020 2181:talk 2123:talk 2119:John 2096:talk 2036:talk 2032:John 1989:talk 1940:talk 1901:talk 1856:talk 1820:talk 1810:John 1798:talk 1788:and 1677:talk 1635:talk 1599:talk 1573:talk 1521:talk 1479:talk 1422:talk 1385:talk 1345:talk 1309:and 1212:Next 1139:will 1131:and 1091:talk 1055:talk 1020:talk 984:talk 941:talk 906:talk 860:talk 840:talk 826:talk 807:talk 770:talk 742:talk 738:MRSC 697:talk 693:MRSC 658:talk 654:MRSC 644:talk 638:Can 629:talk 625:MRSC 583:talk 579:YLee 497:talk 481:and 329:very 1567:). 1377:why 1336:why 1283:say 1147:out 1145:or 897:now 554:v. 432:• ( 361:• ( 267:• ( 2261:: 2246:) 2210:) 2183:) 2125:) 2117:-- 2098:) 2054:, 2038:) 1991:) 1942:) 1903:) 1893:}} 1887:{{ 1858:) 1822:) 1800:) 1679:) 1637:) 1601:) 1575:) 1523:) 1481:) 1424:) 1387:) 1347:) 1296:Φ 1225:Φ 1172:Φ 1143:in 1093:) 1057:) 1022:) 986:) 943:) 862:) 842:) 828:) 809:) 772:) 744:) 713:}} 707:{{ 699:) 660:) 631:) 585:) 499:) 489:}} 483:{{ 479:}} 473:{{ 392:}} 386:{{ 380:• 376:• 300:). 232:-- 88:, 2242:( 2230:7 2225:5 2206:( 2179:( 2159:7 2154:5 2121:( 2094:( 2077:7 2072:5 2062:: 2050:@ 2034:( 2010:7 2005:5 1987:( 1961:7 1956:5 1938:( 1922:7 1917:5 1899:( 1877:7 1872:5 1854:( 1842:7 1837:5 1818:( 1812:: 1808:@ 1796:( 1776:7 1771:5 1761:: 1757:@ 1747:7 1742:5 1699:7 1694:5 1675:( 1662:7 1657:5 1633:( 1597:( 1571:( 1542:7 1537:5 1519:( 1502:7 1497:5 1477:( 1443:7 1438:5 1420:( 1407:7 1402:5 1383:( 1367:7 1362:5 1343:( 1326:7 1321:5 1261:: 1257:@ 1248:7 1243:5 1208:: 1204:@ 1195:7 1190:5 1135:: 1127:@ 1089:( 1076:7 1071:5 1053:( 1041:7 1036:5 1018:( 1006:7 1001:5 982:( 965:7 960:5 939:( 926:7 921:5 904:( 886:7 881:5 858:( 838:( 824:( 805:( 792:7 787:5 768:( 740:( 728:7 723:5 695:( 683:7 678:5 656:( 647:· 642:( 627:( 605:7 600:5 581:( 527:7 522:5 495:( 436:) 410:7 405:5 394:? 365:) 319:7 314:5 271:) 100:. 42::

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index