Talk:2017 Scottish Labour leadership election
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Campaign and controversy
editHi @Jhello123:! You seem to disagree with every edit I made in my latest edit here, so I thought I'd spell out my reasoning. I'd like to know where you disagree. The line as I had it: "whilst Sarwar is described by as more moderate." is drawn from the Times article, which says "Anas Sarwar, 34, of Labour’s moderate wing". The article isn't in support of him, it's reporting the contest, so I don't see how "is described by supporters as a moderate" is preferable or drawn from the source. With my phrasing, "and by critics as [[Blairite]" doesn't fit, so I removed it. I'm not really sure its giving due weight to include it. Similarly by WP:DUE I condensed the summary of Leonard's proposal and attached it to the rest of his proposals in the paragraph before, because it is on the same subject (Leonard's campaign proposals). Wikipedia isn't promotional, so I don't see how we need policy platforms to be fully spelt out. We should just present an encyclopedic summary.
The line "Sarwar has faced accusations of opportunism for claiming to support Jeremy Corbyn after previously supporting New Labour policies, holding the position of vice-chair of New Labour pressure group Progress and calling for Corbyn's resignation whilst supporting his challenger Owen Smith in the 2016 Labour leadership contest." is entirely composed of material not in the source. The source doesn't suggest due weight either, as it as a letter rather than coverage of the letter. Spelling out criticism of Sarwar's wealth in full detail seems to me to also be undue weight - we should present a summary from a neutral point of view. Let me know your thoughts! Ralbegen (talk) 18:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
CLP Numbers
editHi @FriendlyDataNerdV2: Scottish CLPs are organised around Holyrood boundaries, with most covering one Scottish Parliament constituency, but some covering two. In particular, Dundee City East and Dundee City West constituencies organise as Dundee City LP; Perthshire North and Perthshire South and Kinross-shire constituencies organise as Perth and Kinross LP; Galloway and West Dumfries, and Dumfriesshire constituencies organise as Dumfires and Galloway LP per the party's website. Hence from 73 constituencies there are 70 CLPs. Hope that helps.
As an aside; might it be worth listing the number of councillor nominations for each candidate? Probably not worth listing all the councillors, though. Ralbegen (talk) 21:35, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- Aha, cheers! Makes sense. So shall we go with 41 / 70 CLPs for Leonard and 16 / 70 for Sarwar? Seems the way to do things here. And aye, councillor numbers sounds like a good plan, I'll draw something up. Thanks again! FriendlyDataNerdV2 (talk) 21:42, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- No worries! Those are the numbers I think we should use. Ralbegen (talk) 21:49, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- Addition to this: despite the IP address user's claims, the only reliable information we have is from CLP nominations, who say that there are 70 CLPs. 43 nominated Leonard, 16 Sarwar and 11 made no nomination. Whoever is editing anonymously, if they see this can they please provide sources for their argument? Only the Scottish Labour website and the Twitter account are tracking this information and I haven't seen anything to suggest they're wrong. https://twitter.com/CLPNominations/status/918801001414582272 FriendlyDataNerdV2 (talk) 20:55, 13 October 2017 (UTC)