Talk:Reform UK

Ghost candidates

Should we write anything on the accusations of Reform running ghost candidates in multiple constituencies such as Mark Matlock in Clapham and Brixton Hill or the candidate in Leeds North East? Reference here Locked101 (talk) 15:49, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Right now there's simply not enough information on this and it's a just a conspiracy theory. It could even be a BLP violation (assuming Mark Matlock is, in fact, real). If the electoral commission discovers something it might then become notable. — Czello ^(music) 15:53, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Following on from this, it now appears to have been confirmed that he's real. — Czello ^(music) 20:48, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Election Section needs work, Add: Election Results section

The Elections section really needs some work. Every other UK political party has an Election Results section that just displays tables of the results. This page has the 2024 table buried under 3 paragraphs of text. It should be in the same place as the 2019 table. And it should indicate an increase in vote share, etc. Look at any UK political party, and indeed most European political party wikipedia pages and get this one up to that standard. Thank you. 2600:1700:8C30:1350:F4DC:E0B1:EFEA:B306 (talk) 16:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Limited company/FT source

Reform UK is mentioned as being "unusual" for a political party, but when I read the wiki article on political parties I couldn't see how the structure differs. The FT times is behind a paywall/registration; is that a suitable source? The Guardian just repeats the party has unusual structure, without explaining why.Halbared (talk) 13:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

We use paywalled sources, and for some reason I was able to read it anyway. I can't now. The Guardian says "Farage owns a majority of shares in Reform UK Party Ltd, which is registered with Companies House." Our general article on political parties is irrelevant. There are no political groups in the UK owned by shareholders other than this one that I know of, certainly none with MPs. There are of course other sources stating the same thing, also stating who owns the other shares. Also note that Farage is quoted in the article: "He saw the Brexit Party doing the same kind of thing and "running a company, not a political party, hence our model of registered supporters" " Reform is just the new name for the Brexit Party. Doug Weller talk 14:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the response. Paywalled sources are not very good if they can't be accessed, and the Guardian didn't answer my question, though you did here, thank you for that. I found a good source as to why Reform is different from other parties. Prominence is given to Reform being a limited company which raised my pondering on how other parties are 'set-up.' I wanted to know the structure of how a political party should work, which I expected to find on the political party page, which is why I mentioned it. I found a rather good source anyway on what makes Reform unusual from the other, older parties. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/reform-uk-nigel-farage-election-b2556355.html.Halbared (talk) 17:57, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Good source. I could find the quote "Mr Farage claimed Reform UK would “democratise over time” after he was accused of running a “one-man dictatorship” by broadcasters." Also here[1] which is interesting as he says their constatation (which is where?) allows 2/3rd of the membership to kick him out. Note that he stonewalls on whether the company sill stay. See also [2] and [3]. Doug Weller talk 10:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I’m putting up here because although another editor saw fit to exclude this information from the lede, with the edit summary "Major British political parties have companies associated with them. Take it to the talk-page." it has just been plonked into para. 1 of the lede. I have reverted that edit for the following reasons. Even if it is established that this information should be included in the lede, it should not be prioritised above all the other information therein, which is what the latest edit did. Is the fact that it is a limited company more important than the facts that it is a political party, which has innumerable policies, which gained 14% of the vote at the general election? Of course not. Boscaswell talk 20:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Boscaswell But it is. No other political party is controlled by shareholders. And are you suggesting that there is a party membership that can elect the party leader and help set its policies. As an aside, paywalled sources are fine. And there are others. Doug Weller talk 20:49, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Having a company associated with a party is in no way equivalent with a party being a limited company, how can you possibly think it is? Doug Weller talk 20:53, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

2019 platform

This is already a long article, is there any point in having the old platform in the article? Doug Weller talk 08:19, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Why would we not have it? Information is not removed simply because it's old. See WP:NOTTEMPORARY. Keeper of Albion (talk) 20:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I don’t see what it adds to the article. And the longer the article the less likely people will keep reading it. Doug Weller talk 20:40, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

The 2019 platform is just a few bullet points - it’s easy to scan and pass over. Readers are going to skip certain sections anyway, aren’t they? Boscaswell talk 20:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

This is the article for the third-most-voted-for political party in a country that once ruled the world. It's a fair assumption that there will be readers who are interested in its platform from 2019. Those who are not will likely opt not to read that section. Keeper of Albion (talk) 22:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Farage has said he will put the consittution before the conference

That was on 5 July. What conference and what constitution? An old one is discussed in the archives with some news sources and I presume that one is still the legal one. Doug Weller talk 16:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Presumably this - the Articles of Association of the company. In the Indie article referenced in the Limited company discussion above, it says "Mr Farage claimed Reform UK would “democratise over time” after he was accused of running a “one-man dictatorship” by broadcasters." Perhaps the two statements are in alignment. Boscaswell talk 20:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

If that link to the Articles of Association doesn’t work, click on the pdf from here. It’s about half way down, "Resolution of Adoption of Articles of Assication", 7 pages. Boscaswell talk 21:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the article really needs a bit of a rewrite the funding and party structure, which is at least unusual if not unique, which I think it is in the UK. I'd suggest breaking that into two sections for easier reading. We would need to include the new sources such as this which mentions Habib.

The present section also starts a bit abruptly I think and the first sentence could be rewritten, eg "When the Brexit party was created/formed it was limited company" because as it stands it says it only had three members and then says it decided to have no members, which makes no sense if you know nothing about it.

I think that the first sentence should say "and limited company" - it's succinct and accurate and follows our NPOV policy.

Even with that, the lead needs to say more about its structure, as it doesn't follow our guideline at WP:NPOV. Doug Weller talk 10:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Another source:[4]. By the way, Bylinetimes is not a good source.

Thinking about the lead a bit more, although I think structure and finances should be separate sections, summarizing them together in one para for the lead should work. Doug Weller talk 13:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I’ll have a go at a re-write of that section soon. I've been busy with other stuff… Boscaswell talk 07:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I know busy. Doug Weller talk 07:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)