| Revision as of 15:26, 12 June 2015 edit1990'sguy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers23,782 edits Nominated article for WP:GA.← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:09, 17 June 2015 edit undoRGloucester (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers38,757 edits template clean-upNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{pp-move-vandalism|small=yes}} | {{pp-move-vandalism|small=yes}} | ||
| ⚫ | {{GA nominee|15:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC)|nominator=] (])|page=1|subtopic=Politics and government|status=|note=}} | ||
| {{Talk header}} | {{Talk header}} | ||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | ||
| Line 16: | Line 15: | ||
| {{WikiProject Scotland|class=b|importance=high}}}} | {{WikiProject Scotland|class=b|importance=high}}}} | ||
| {{DYK talk|14 September|2009|{{*mp}}... that the ''']''' proposes that a referendum on ] be held on ] 2010, Scotland's official ]?}} | {{DYK talk|14 September|2009|{{*mp}}... that the ''']''' proposes that a referendum on ] be held on ] 2010, Scotland's official ]?}} | ||
| ⚫ | {{GA nominee|15:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC)|nominator=] (])|page=1|subtopic=Politics and government|status=|note=}} | ||
| {{Scottish English}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 100K | |maxarchivesize = 100K | ||
Revision as of 03:09, 17 June 2015
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2014 Scottish independence referendum article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | A fact from 2014 Scottish independence referendum appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 September 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
 |
2014 Scottish independence referendum is currently a Politics and government good article nominee. Nominated by 1990'sguy (talk) at 15:26, 12 June 2015 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria and will decide whether or not to list it as a good article. Comments are welcome from any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article. This review will be closed by the first reviewer. To add comments to this review, click discuss review and edit the page.
|
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2014 Scottish independence referendum article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
Results Map
As the counting areas for the referendums are the 32 Scottish Councils all we simply need is a blank map of the council areas with maybe the slight addiction of a close up of the councils areas within the central belt, I also propose the colours is green for "yes" and red for "no" the map should like this but could a close up of Central Scotland be added at all? (90.198.143.132 (talk) 07:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC))
- Won't this mislead readers into thinking that votes are counted on a regional basis, like votes in a general election? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:51, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
- I get what you mean and I have been listening to the BBC during the course of today and it's confirmed that unlike the referendum held in 2011 on AV there are only two layers of counting, the thirty two local counting areas and the national count and we don't want to give a impression of a regional count at all so I suggest we now don't do that however I do recommend that the map could be adjusted say that it's a bit closer out by having the Shetland Islands as a separate box as it is a separate counting area to the Orkney Islands so I suggest we go along with something like that instead. (90.200.228.123 (talk) 17:58, 17 September 2014 (UTC))
- I mean the local results will not affect the overall final result. It's just easier counting votes locally than having the ballot papers transported to a single central counting point. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
- Of course, why hasn't the results section been set up especially as we are now just twelve hours away from the first results being declared so could the map and results from all thirty two councils please be urgentlyset up so it's ready for filling in tonight, I also propose that we use the same format be used for the results in each of the 32 councils in the 1997 Scottish devolution referendum page so it looks very similar to the following.
- I mean the local results will not affect the overall final result. It's just easier counting votes locally than having the ballot papers transported to a single central counting point. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:30, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
(90.200.228.123 (talk) 13:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC))
- Looks very good to me! Gerard von Hebel (talk) 13:51, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- Tables are already there; they're just not displayed on the page yet, to deter vandalism. EddieHugh (talk) 13:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- I re-added the "update" template because, although all results are now in, the Highland area is still grey on the map. There isn't even any explanatiom of what grey means in the key. I think the editor who was very kindly updating the map may now have gone to bed! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
- I see the map is now correctly updated. But I notice that the key shows only two colours, while the areas on the map have colours of various saturations. Should the colours used all be explained, or does it not matter? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
- I re-added the "update" template because, although all results are now in, the Highland area is still grey on the map. There isn't even any explanatiom of what grey means in the key. I think the editor who was very kindly updating the map may now have gone to bed! Martinevans123 (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I am not sure the colour scheme reflects the position appropriately. Take Highlands, for example, there 47% voted Yes. That, by any imagination, should represent a fairly slender shade of red. Cripipper (talk) 23:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Biased Violence In Glasgow
This section seems heavily favoured towards the Yes voters, somewhat demonizing the No votes - the mention of Nazi salutes especially leaves a sour taste in the mouth. Irockz (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- The Nazi stuff is in the source, but the phrasing in this article is one-sided. I think that the section should be removed, unless there are further reports of violence specifically related to the referendum. If we included every fight on a Friday night in Scotland in Misplaced Pages we'd have a lot of trivia. If it's an isolated incident (and as it's probably not really referendum-specific), then it can be removed. EddieHugh (talk) 22:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:36, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed I have difficulties with the wording of the section. To equate people with violent or disruptive behavior, who also make Nazi salutes, with the unionists as a group seems highly problematic to me. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 01:32, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Fixed -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- This was much more than a drunken brawl after closing time; this was a "riot" in the heart of Scotland's biggest city, involving over 700 people, sparked by the referendum result. The content and phrasing is taken directly from the sources: The Guardian and The Scotsman (two mainstream newspapers which both backed a 'No' vote). Had 'Yes' supporters acted the same way, that would've been put into the article too, but we can only report what happened. Also, I don't see why we should avoid reporting the violence just because it's only happened once (so far).
- How should the section be re-worded? ~Asarlaí 03:07, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
- I think this section is relevant, although it seems a bit biased especially as there is no mention of the widespread intimidation by the Yes side during the campaign. There were countless media reports of such intimidation and also reports of the Union flag having been desecrated, so perhaps including this would make this section a bit more balanced? EgilOrndal (talk) 04:56, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- The section currently deals only with the violence in the aftermath of the referendum result. It may be appropriate to create a new section dealing with in-campaign intimidation and violence, providing there is a sufficient number of high quality references. BananaLanguage (talk) 07:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- I'm not convinced that violence in Glasgow needs to be reported. Was it a significant feature of the referendum? Isn't there always violence in Glasgow? Dbfirs 08:00, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- It was a significant feature of the reaction to the result, the section it is included. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- The troublemakers are identified as "loyalists". However, they seem to have been fascists parasitical on the general loyalist movement. Wikiain (talk) 23:23, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- Significant only in Glasgow? I suppose it's worth a passing mention since some newspapers reported it. Dbfirs 16:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- They were UDA / UDF supporters. It was significant beyond Glasgow in that it revealed the voting reasons of a section of the population - though it might be hard to find usable sources (sectarian issues are not well reported, if mentioned at all). I know the issue was reported in Irish republic media, revealing that "loyalists" in Northern Ireland (and their offshoot population in central Scotland) firmly believed a Yes vote would mean the inevitable eventual unification of Ulster with the rest of Ireland. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:36, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- It was a significant feature of the reaction to the result, the section it is included. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- This section is a bit problematic because there was undoubtedly an intentional attempt by people on social media to exaggerate the scale of the violence. One of the claims here, which unfortunately ended up in the Daily Mirror, is that a saltire was burned, but this stemmed from a misleading picture of a flare (not a burning flag) that actually came from a Yes supporters' event several days previously. That was one rumour that made it into the papers, there were numerous others (a young boy being stabbed to death) that didn't. It's worth saying this because it might not be apparent to anyone unfamiliar with the events and future editors should know this for background. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.17.69 (talk) 20:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the bit about the flag burning because the Daily Mirror is not a reliable source, particularly in light of your assertion that that incident was exaggerated / not accurately reported. The rest is reliably sourced. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 20:37, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
Infobox map error?
The current version of the Results by council area map in the Infobox appears to have assigned a colour to Republic of Ireland. This colour may be intended to be grey but it looks too similar to the colour of some of the light red regions. Could someone please redraw the map to address this concern? BananaLanguage (talk) 08:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
#Further devolution
The reference with ref name="petition" (currently ref 284) is not about these matters. Wikiain (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
- That should have fixed it. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 05:57, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Proposed merge with The Vow (devolution promise)
Basically subset of the referendum, also article name is unnecessarily vague/generic and can apply to so much stuff. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 13:09, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I think Smith Commission would be a more appropriate target, as that is the process that followed from "the vow" and covers much the same ground. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 13:39, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'd say it's more a referendum thing. There might be a note of it as history in the Smith Commission article, but "the vow" was part of the referendum campaign. —ajf (talk) 20:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- A further note: "The Vow" isn't vague, it is the name used to refer to it in Scottish politics. Might be improved by changing it from "The Vow (devolution promise)" to "The Vow (Scottish devolution)", though. —ajf (talk) 18:44, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Elections and Referendums articles
- WikiProject Elections and Referendums articles
- B-Class European Union articles
- High-importance European Union articles
- WikiProject European Union articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
- B-Class Politics of the United Kingdom articles
- High-importance Politics of the United Kingdom articles
- B-Class Scotland articles
- High-importance Scotland articles
- All WikiProject Scotland pages
- Misplaced Pages Did you know articles
- Good article nominees
- Good article nominees on review