Talk:2006 Liberal Democrats leadership election

message: He's been interviewed on both Newsnight and New 24 and his comments have been tending towards "I am not going to stand against Charles Kennedy" although he hasn't been the most empathic. Timrollpickering 03:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since Kennedy's resignation, on News 24 he said he'd support Campbell, although only grudgingly given his choice of words! Bondegezou 20:51, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vincent Cable

message: I think she will be likely to announce an intention to stand within the next few days, because of her actions on Friday. Mikeroberts 13:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She was on Sky News suggesting support for Ming, I can't find an internet link at the moment, but she said something like Menzies has her respect and the respect of constituencies. doktorb | words 20:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: She's now been removed from the list of potential candidates.  Any reason why?  It states that she supports Ming Campbell, and I am aware of Doktorb saying that she did, but is there any written/online evidence of that yet? (Jamandell (d69) 17:48, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is so frustrating because I've seen  her on the television supporting Ming! And I can't find anything on  BBC News to confirm that. She is certainly a Campbell supporter, as she has confirmed in interviews, but I just cannot find any internet sources for this at the moment. doktorb | words 18:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I believe you now, in a way I was hoping you weren't true, as I was hoping for her to stand, but oh well!  Thanks (Jamandell (d69) 20:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sarah Teather

message: Is there any source for their declining now that Kennedy has withdrawn? Timrollpickering 15:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both said on BBC News 24 that they'd support Campbell. Someone had updated the page to say Opik was also supporting Campbell, but prior to Campbell saying he would stand, he's said (again to BBC News 24) that he would support Mark Oaten if Oaten stands. Any clarification anyone? Bondegezou 16:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Opik will back Oaten if he stands but he hasn't yet decided. Until and unless Oaten says he won't stand, I don't think it's accurate to say that Opik backs Campbell. --Whouk (talk) 17:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Matthew Taylor & Nick Clegg

message: Should we have a section on Kennedy's downfall? OldManSin 16:31, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest that should be covered on Kennedy's entry. Bondegezou 16:33, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we need a bit here on the general background with a See Main Article: Charles Kennedy as it puts the event in contect. Timrollpickering 16:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, perhaps there should be a few paragraphs on here, or perhaps a link to Kennedy's page. Mikeroberts 16:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

text:  I have now included the work that was done on Kennedy's page, it is now also section 4 and 5 of this page also Mikeroberts 16:51, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps not ideal, but I think it is important, as do others, to have some text about Kennedy's downfall. I only intended it to be temporary, so that it could be edited by somebody else into something more helpful. Perhaps you would like to have a go? Mikeroberts 18:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Events leading up to

message: Why are half the people working on this page also Doctor Who fans? Bondegezou 22:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because many of those editing here are Liberal Democrats (contributing their expertise while trying to retain a NPOV, of course), and geeky LibDems tend, for some reason, also to be Doctor Who fans. --Whouk (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what to make of that above comment, being a Lib Dem supporter myself. (Jamandell (d69) 00:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Guilty as charged =) LibDem and Doctor Who fan. Also quite a fan of following boundary commission decisions...er.... doktorb | words 07:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I can't say how common this is, but I definitely fit the description of a 'geeky LibDem Doctor Who fan' :). Maybe it's to do with the sci-fi-like hope that the party will be Government? -UK-Logician-2006 16:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Well for balance I'm a Doctor Who fan but most definitely not a supporter of the Lib Dems! Timrollpickering 16:24, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Did the Pertwee incarnation's exile ever coincide with the existance of the Lib Dems? (The Paradise of Death implicitly suggests it might have.) In any case surely he'd be a Macmillan/Edward Heath Conservative although it's not clear if the UNIT stories take place early enough for that to matter. The McCoy Doctor would just vote for whoever the history books say won - so probably not the Lib Dems. And I reckon the Hartnell incarnation would decline to interfere and tell any canvasser to bugger off. Timrollpickering 01:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Miscellanea

message: (Copied from my own post on Talk:Menzies Campbell)
The coverage is unclear as to whether Ming is currently formally the Deputy Leader acting as leader whilst the post of Leader is vacant or somehow has been automatically become Leader. If he doesn't win the leadership election will he still be Deputy Leader or would there have to be a fresh official election (of MPs if I remember correctly) even if just to reappoint him? Timrollpickering 03:31, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Campbell only became Deputy Leader in 2003, when Alan Beith stood down. His principal challenger was expected to be Simon Hughes but Hughes opted to run for the Mayor of London rather than fight for the Deputy Leadership. Therefore Campbell was elected unopposed and very quietly in October. I couldn't find any details of who elects the Deputy Leader but it is clearly a separate process from the Leadership, so if Campbell were to lose the leadership election, he could continue as Deputy Leader if he wanted. The Lib Dems' website implies that the leadership is vacant and Simon Hughes said yesterday that Campbell was "interim Leader" so I would say it's a case of the Deputy acting-up, rather than the Deputy being automatically promoted. David | Talk 10:55, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Deputy Leader is elected by the parliamentary party. --Whouk (talk) 11:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Okay shall we do Liberal Democrats deputy leadership election, 2003 and, if necessary, Liberal Democrats deputy leadership election, 2006? Timrollpickering 02:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Campbell still officially Deputy Leader? 

message: "Simon Hughes also asks a question at PMQs but receives _equally_ poor reviews."
Is this NPOV? Most reviews I've seen said he didnt' do well but not as bad as Ming did. AndrewRT 18:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was my impression too. --Whouk (talk) 19:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PMQs 

message: It's up to about 36kb at the moment. Do we need to think about how we can trim it down/split it up? --Whouk (talk) 00:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The timeline is the obvious part to hive off into something like Timeline of events in the Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2006 or whatever snappy form is used for other elections. Timrollpickering 01:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As no-one's said anything against it, I'll hive off the timeline into a separate article this afternoon unless anyone speaks up in the next couple of hours. I'll try to ensure all the references match up and are in order at the same time. --Whouk (talk) 11:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now done, slightly later than planned. --Whouk (talk) 13:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article size 

message: I would like to change the formatting of the candidates section so that you can get a better list of who is supporting which candidate. Let me know what you think! AndrewRT 22:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The best way might be to split the second level bullets into categories: MPs, peers, MEPs, etc. Feel free to make changes, or to put an example format on this page, or in a subpage of your userpage. --Whouk (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candidates formatting 

message: What do we do with this YouGov poll?  The poll definitely happened.  Numbers were given to two different websites by an anonymous source (or anonymous sources - we have no way of knowing if it's the same source).  Peter Kellner, CEO of YouGov has specifically and unequivocally denied the accuracy of the numbers, but won't reveal what the numbers actually are, not even if they will be revealed later.
Should we (a) ignore it, (b) print the numbers with a big fat disclaimer, or (c) create a page about that story and link it?
--Po8crg 09:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as it has a health warning, I think (b) is acceptable. It is not unsourced, but it needs to be made clear that the source isn't YouGov itself. —Whouk (talk) 09:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaked poll 

message: Ming's election means there'll now automatically be a Deputy Leadership election. I've started a page for it at Liberal Democrats deputy leadership election, 2006. Timrollpickering 15:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deputy Leadership 

message: Note: if non-transferable votes are discounted, the percentage of the vote won by Campbell is 57.9% and that won by Huhne is 42.1%. Simon Hughes' second preferences split as follows: Campbell 53.2%, Huhne 40.9%, non-transferable (i.e. no second preference given) 5.9%.
This first figure (Campbell 57.9% / Huhne 42.1%) is, in Australia's STV elections, called the two-party preferred voted vote (or, in this case, the two-candidate preferred vote).
-- tilthouse 05:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Australia has compulsory full preferencing (federally at least) so it's not quite the same thing. Timrollpickering (talk) 20:55, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two-Candidate Preferred Vote  

message: The naming of this article frustrates me. It does not imply anything about the scope of the article or who it refers to. I had to open the article to discover it was referring to the English party. MyNameIsNotBob 10:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the title refers to the British party.   Since the party's article is at Liberal Democrats, it seems that (perhaps surprisingly) there are no other parties of the same name, and so no need for disambiguation. HenryFlower 10:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue of naming the Liberal Democrats and whether the title needed to indicate that they are a UK party has been discussed (a lot) on Talk:Liberal Democrats. The conclusion reached was that Liberal Democrats (not plural) is fine on its own because there is no other party that calls itself "the Liberal Democrats". However, there are many "Liberal Democratic Parties", so the page has a disambiguation link to Liberal Democratic Party at the top. It was also noted that "Liberal Democrat" (singular) could refer to other parties than the Liberal Democrats (not to mention refering to the concept of liberal democracy), which is why Liberal Democrat is a disambiguation page. Hope this clears up the issue. Tamino 10:29, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article naming 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:11, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Chris Huhne.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Clegg is listed as supporting both Chris Huhne and Menzies Campbell. Is that correct? Should there be citations for the supporters? 86.167.49.31 (talk) 02:24, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nick Clegg 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2006. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060516033026/http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/kennedy-calls-for-leadership-election.html to http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/kennedy-calls-for-leadership-election.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:52, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2006. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060220065739/http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/ldelections/all-member.htm to http://www.cix.co.uk/~rosenstiel/ldelections/all-member.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://chris2win.org/pages/supporterslist.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chris2win.org/news/15.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:44, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2006. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060114050140/http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article337999.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article337999.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060205184203/http://www.campbellcampaign.org/list-of-supporters/ to http://www.campbellcampaign.org/list-of-supporters/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930212136/http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article339833.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article339833.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060118040656/http://simonhughes4leader.co.uk/ to http://www.simonhughes4leader.co.uk/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060422060021/http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article347539.ece to http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article347539.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060422060048/http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article347727.ece to http://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article347727.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070213025743/http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article344948.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article344948.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930184334/http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article339323.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article339323.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930200423/http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article339578.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article339578.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070108173020/http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article347590.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article347590.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060207003425/http://www.mori.com/polls/2006/mpm060123.shtml to http://www.mori.com/polls/2006/mpm060123.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060204021720/http://www.chris2win.org.uk/ to http://www.chris2win.org.uk/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060110140222/http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/charles-kennedy-resigns.html to http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/charles-kennedy-resigns.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:20, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified