Talk:2009 European Parliament election in the United Kingdom

message: The info box has Labour going from 19 seats down to 13, but calls this a drop of 5. Which of the numbers is wrong?137.222.142.50 (talk) 09:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Labour seat numbers 

message: Parties and coverage should be included. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.29.210.111 (talk) 15:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Ireland 

message: 2 things:
(a) might be 73 now not 72
(b) seat allocation is different
See http://www.vote-2007.co.uk/index.php?topic=1581.0 AndrewRT(Talk) 21:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New seats 

message: From the article:
:It has been predicted that the election may coincide with the next general election.[1]
The reference links to a People story from March 2007. The political landscape has changed hugely since then, and it now seems very unlikely that the general election will be held until 2010. Loganberry (Talk) 12:39, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Super Thursday" is now very unlikely 

message: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/4214369/Loosen-Britains-ties-with-European-Union-say-two-thirds-of-voters..html
YouGov polled 2,157 adults between 6 January and 8 January:
(+/- from 2004 election)
Con 35% (+8)
Lab 29% (+6)
LD 15% (n/c)
UKIP 7% (-9)
Grn 5% (-1)
BNP 4% (-1)
SNP/PC 4% (+2)
--Mais oui! (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Still no other European voting intentions polls since YouGov/TPA one in January, I'm afraid. One would suspect that we might begin to get some in the next couple of weeks, especially now that the official 'Notice of Election' has been made. Spiritofsussex (talk) 13:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  First poll 

message: I have certain concerns about this section, namely that the Predict09 website is not proper opinion polling, rather an adjustment of 2004 results to account for the new regional allocations of MEPs. Secondly, all future polls should be specifically about voting intentions for the European elections. In particular, percentage-of-the-vote results for the minor parties (UKIP, Greens, SNP, BNP et al) differ greatly between national and European elections. Also, as a rule, there should be static links to trusted sites, i.e. major polling organisations, or national newspapers. 
I vote that the Predict09 results be moved or removed:
Furthermore, if we are happy as a 'community' for there to be opinion poll results on this page, then more up-to-date results ought to be sourced.Orthorhombic (talk) 14:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion polls: principles 

message: As well as a Great Britain Result, there should also be an "England" result, a "Wales" result and a "Scotland" result
Several Political Parties are now only competing in their own Country
ie
SNP
PC
English Democrats  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.2.97.151 (talk) 16:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  England, Scotland, Wales =

message: WP is a poorer place for not having an article on these folks. Drutt (talk) 20:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing stopping you writing one. - Galloglass 20:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But is there enough to write about?doktorb wordsdeeds 21:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See Roman Party Ave! - currently up for deletion. Greenshed (talk) 23:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Roman Party Ave!

message: Could someone find a head and shoulders of Caroline Lucas as a matter of urgency. I have found pictures for the other four leaders for the parties that were already represented in these election boxes. Orthorhombic (talk) 10:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caroline Lucas 

message: Should the tables on this page be sortable? I feel being able to sort them could aid in understanding the results, when they become apparent. Greg Tyler (t • c) 23:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sortable 

message: I know Scotland has not been officially declared, but unless 20,000+ people have moved to the Western Isles, the results are completely certain in Britain now. Con 25, UKIP 13, Lab 13, Lib Dem 11, 2 Green, BNP 2, SNP 2, Plaid Cymru 1. I suggest we update the infobox at the top of the page with the new seat numbers. Are there any objections? --Woodgreener (talk) 01:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final results for England, Scotland, Wales 

message: I do not think it is right that the Greens and the BNP are on the infobox when the SNP equaly got two MEPs elected. I suggest removing the Greens and the BNP and just having the four main parties up. I don't know if it's possible with the infobox, but its layout would, in that case, be better to have two at the top and two at the bottom. Jolly Ω Janner 16:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a bit OTT to have more than the main parties on there. I would agree with just having the main three or four. Setwisohi (talk) 17:02, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'd suggest to keep the main four parties as they're the only ones that are well above 10%. That appears to be a good rule for the future unless Labour will drop below 10% next time :D (who knows?).--Kojozone (talk) 17:51, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

text: The policy for general election infoboxes has been, any national party to win seats has been entered into the infobox. The SNP and Plaid are not national parties so they don't get a place in the box. I think the same policy should apply here. --Philip Stevens (talk) 06:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Disagree, Scotland and Wales are separate nations, and these are their national parties. DR2006kl (talk) 07:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: When I said 'national' I meant UK-wide. A party should only be in the infobox if it's won seats and has fielded candidates across Great Britain (if not Northern Ireland). --Philip Stevens (talk) 09:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

text:  Separate nations? They're part of the UK.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.24.101 (talk) 08:51, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nation does not mean the same thing as state or country. --Joowwww (talk) 10:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

text: SNP and Plaid, and to that effect, the DUP and Sinn Fein, only field candidates in one region, whereas the BNP and Greens fielded candidates in all of Great Britain (plus a Green candidate in Northern Ireland). Personally, I think any party should be eligible for EP election infobox inclusion if a) they field candidates in more than one region (which would discount the Roman Party if they won) and b) they win a seat. WRT UK general elections, I think that a cutoff between 2% (12 seats) and 5% (30 seats) would make them eligible for infobox inclusion. 15-20 seems to be a magic number. Sceptre (talk) 15:17, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who should be on the infobox? 

message: Could we have a section on how the Conservative Party (with the largest number of MEPs) intends to leave the EPP-ED, and create their own political group? – Anxietycello (talk) 18:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Likewise a section on UKIP as there is no longer enough support for the ID group to continue. (Most other eurosceptic parties were wiped out; Sweden, Denmark, Ireland and Poland). Setwisohi (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tory's new group in parliament 

message: as the UKIP had more votes than Labour, it is disingenuous to list Labour above the UKIP even if they will have the same number of MEP's. 09:35, 8 June 2009 209.191.2.162
I had to respond to the above comment by someone editing the article page. Considering that Labour had been above UKIP in the last election and that the Scottish results had only just come out, it real is stupid to accuse other editors of being "disingenuous". No-one was trying to give the wrong impression; the page obviously just needed more work. 79.77.195.161 (talk) 23:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irritating comment 

message: It seems odd to treat Northern Ireland separately.  It would seem more consistent either to give the results for the United Kingdom as a whole or else to give results for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - or perhaps for each of the twelve regions with a total for the whole UK.
Is it because NI uses the single transferable vote system?  If so, it would be helpful to provide an explanation just before the table.Apuldram (talk) 13:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Different political parties and a different voting system. I think it should remain separate. David (talk) 13:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Scotland and Wales have different political parties as well, so that doesn't explain the different treatment.  If it is because of the different voting system, I say again it would be helpful to explain this just before the table.Apuldram (talk) 14:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The BBC notes that they use a seperate system. Anxietycello (talk) 19:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Labour and Conservative get into Wales, Labour, Lib Dems and Conservative get into Scotland. Where are they in Northern Ireland? Jolly Ω Janner 23:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Conservatives of course won an MEP from Northern Ireland and made a big deal about having MEPs from all four constituent parts of the UK. Nonetheless, I still think we should keep NI separate and consider splitting out Wales and Scotland too. English regions should be kept together as they all had the same major parties contesting. AndrewRT(Talk)(WMUK) 00:51, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Northern Ireland treated separately? 

message: * Do the BBC's figures have official status? Is there no official source for these figures?
* Has anyone seen a figure for "invalid votes"?
Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 06:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Electoral Commission is using the BBC as their source for the figures at the moment, but I expect that the Electoral Commission will publish their own full results in the near future. However, until this happens, it would appears they are endorsing the BBC's results. Spiritofsussex (talk) 08:03, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Amazing. They do better in Bulgaria. You'd think the UK was a third-world country. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 23:32, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Source of figures

message: The graphic displaying the winning parties in each region appears to contain an error. In the north west england constituency 
it displays the liberal democrat seat with the colour yellow, the same colour used for the scottish national party. I think that it's supposed to be orange like the other lib dem seats. Chris Davies is the MEP whose seat is coloured wrong. 03haya (talk) 13:09, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Winning parties graphic 

message: Here are some links to previous results pages where you can see:
*1999 European Parliament election- UKIP with 3seats in 1999 and Green with 2seats - substantially below that of the other parties so not included. 3rd place Lib Dems on 10- big gap between 3 and 10
* 2004 European Parliament election- Greens with 2Seats in 2004 - substantially below that of the other four parties so not included. 4th place Lib Dems on 12 - big gap between 2 and 12
The argument is that The BNP and Greens are not included on the same basis of the above 2 examples, 2 is still substatially less than 11.
Nick Nick Dancer 22:22, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to Previous Results Pages

message: Those who have not been involved in the debate thus far, please leave your view below, please put a * before your response. Thank you.
*As Doktorbuk says, the rules are kind of fluid. But I think in this case the argument for exclusion is stronger than that for inclusion. When there are only a few parties that won seats, including all of them is the simplest solution. Where, as here, there are eight parties that took seats, a different measure has to be used. Doktorbuk seems to use vote share as his measure. I may well be wrong; I found trying to read the wall of text above with its almost complete lack of indentation too annoying to try to read that I gave up. In any event, under the vote-share measure, I can understand the decision, although the first excluded party is closer to the last included party than the Greens are to the Lib Dems. I don't think that's the right measure, though. The aim of the election is to win the most seats, so that should be the measure. There is a significant drop-off between fourth and fifth, from 11 to 2, with two more two-seat parties following as well as Plaid with their single seat. So I say, drop all after the Lib Dems, and re-arrange to make the table two-by-two. -Rrius (talk) 22:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I'd want people to concentrate on the number of references. Six? Really? The focus should be the article, not the infobox. Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Outside views

message: Election infoboxes, was e'er so much trouble caused by such small things? The full results of the election are given in the article. The infobox is just a summary. As such, what's left out of the infobox shouldn't really matter, yet it does have a significant visual impact on the article and discussion over what to include or exclude often gets emotional. There's no obvious right or wrong answer. Wikipedia policy isn't much help: how do you determine what reliable sources think should be in the infobox? We're left with a rather subjective judgement based on consistency and consensus.
So, what do we do here? Doktorbuk favours including 6 parties, mainly based on those having achieved more than 5% of the total vote share. Everyone else (including me) favours including 4 parties (with different degrees of vehemence): there's a clear drop (a "statistical elbow", as some would call it) between the top 4 and the rest in terms of seats (and, I and others argue, seats matter more than vote share) and (if not as clear) in vote share. The infoboxes for the previous two elections have taken a similar approach.
Wikipedia is not a vote. However, after lengthy discussion, a period of reflection, multiple 'third opinions' and without a clear policy argument against the change, the weight of support for 4 parties now must surely outweigh the one editor favouring 6 and the previous inconclusive Talk page discussion (see above). I'm going to change the infobox now to 4 parties. Bondegezou (talk) 15:40, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: A conclusion?

message: The old map used to show who won seats in each region is so much clearer than the new shaded map. The shading makes it so much harder to see what is going on, and also to see how any seats there are in each region. I suggest we move back to the old map, it's so much clearer. That we use shaded maps for local government results is not an argument for doing so here, it's an argument for changing them. -- Cabalamat (talk) 06:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there some way of using both? They both have things going for them. Bondegezou (talk) 21:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If we used two maps, it would probably make the article look cluttered -- Cabalamat (talk) 19:17, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The old map was much, much clearer 

message: Original Table - Inconsistent with that of other polling, inaccurate, undue weight to low polling parties
European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling	European Parliament Election – Opinion Polling
Firm/Client                                   	Survey end date                               	Con                                           	Labour                                        	UKIP                                          	LibDem                                        	GreenParties*                                 	BNP                                           	SNP                                           	PlaidCymru                                    	Others
YouGov/Daily Telegraph                        	3 June 2009                                   	26%                                           	16%                                           	18%                                           	15%                                           	10%                                           	5%                                            	4% SNP + PC                                   	4% SNP + PC                                   	6%
ComRes/Green Partyof England and Wales        	31 May 2009                                   	24%                                           	22%                                           	17%                                           	14%                                           	15%                                           	2%                                            	3%                                            	-                                             	4%
YouGov/Daily Telegraph                        	29 May 2009                                   	27%                                           	17%                                           	16%                                           	15%                                           	9%                                            	7%                                            	4% SNP + PC                                   	4% SNP + PC                                   	6%
ICM/Sunday Telegraph                          	28 May 2009                                   	29%                                           	17%                                           	10%                                           	20%                                           	11%                                           	5%                                            	5% SNP + PC                                   	5% SNP + PC                                   	3%
Populus/Times                                 	28 May 2009                                   	30%                                           	16%                                           	19%                                           	12%                                           	10%                                           	5%                                            	2%                                            	1%                                            	4%
ICM/Guardian                                  	21 May 2009                                   	30%                                           	24%                                           	10%                                           	18%                                           	9%                                            	1%                                            	4% SNP + PC                                   	4% SNP + PC                                   	3%
YouGov/Daily Telegraph                        	16 May 2009                                   	28%                                           	22%                                           	15%                                           	17%                                           	7%                                            	5%                                            	4% SNP + PC                                   	4% SNP + PC                                   	1%
BPIX/Mail on Sunday                           	16 May 2009                                   	30%                                           	17%                                           	17%                                           	15%                                           	-                                             	5%                                            	-                                             	-                                             	-
ComRes/UKIP                                   	14 May 2009                                   	28%                                           	23%                                           	15%                                           	14%                                           	11%                                           	4%                                            	-                                             	-                                             	5%
YouGov/Sun                                    	14 May 2009                                   	29%                                           	20%                                           	15%                                           	19%                                           	6%                                            	3%                                            	4% SNP + PC                                   	4% SNP + PC                                   	1%
Populus/Times                                 	10 May 2009                                   	34%                                           	25%                                           	6%                                            	20%                                           	5%                                            	2%                                            	4%                                            	2%                                            	1%
YouGov/Sunday Times                           	8 May 2009                                    	36%                                           	25%                                           	7%                                            	20%                                           	4%                                            	4%                                            	4% SNP + PC                                   	4% SNP + PC                                   	1%
ICM/TPA                                       	4 May 2009                                    	32%                                           	28%                                           	9%                                            	22%                                           	1%                                            	1%                                            	4%                                            	2%                                            	-
YouGov/TPA                                    	8 January 2009                                	35%                                           	29%                                           	7%                                            	15%                                           	5%                                            	4%                                            	4% SNP + PC                                   	4% SNP + PC                                   	2%
2004 Election                                 	2004 Election                                 	26.7%                                         	22.6%                                         	16.1%                                         	14.9%                                         	5.8%                                          	4.9%                                          	1.4%                                          	1.0%                                          	6%
2009 Election                                 	2009 Election                                 	27.7%                                         	15.7%                                         	16.5%                                         	13.7%                                         	9.1%                                          	6.2%                                          	2.1%                                          	0.8%                                          	7.9%
*Note: there are two Green parties standing for election in Great Britain: the Green Party of England and Wales and the Scottish Green Party.
Newly Formatted Table - consistent with other polling layouts
Date(s)conducted	Polling organisation/client           	Cons 	Lab  	UKIP 	Lib Dem	<span]]	style="color:White;">Others</span>	1st party lead
3 June 2009     	YouGov/Daily Telegraph                	26%  	16%  	18%  	15%    	25%    	8% over UKIP                      	
31 May 2009     	ComRes/Green Partyof England and Wales	24%  	22%  	17%  	14%    	24%    	2% over Lab                       	
29 May 2009     	YouGov/Daily Telegraph                	27%  	17%  	16%  	15%    	26%    	10% over Lab                      	
28 May 2009     	ICM/Sunday Telegraph                  	29%  	17%  	10%  	20%    	24%    	9% over Lab                       	
28 May 2009     	Populus/Times                         	30%  	16%  	19%  	12%    	22%    	11% over UKIP                     	
21 May 2009     	ICM/Guardian                          	30%  	24%  	10%  	18%    	17%    	6% over Lab                       	
16 May 2009     	YouGov/Daily Telegraph                	28%  	22%  	15%  	17%    	17%    	6% over Lab                       	
16 May 2009     	BPIX/Mail on Sunday                   	30%  	17%  	17%  	15%    	5%     	13% over Lab & UKIP               	
14 May 2009     	ComRes/UKIP                           	28%  	23%  	15%  	14%    	20%    	5% over Lab                       	
14 May 2009     	YouGov/Sun                            	29%  	20%  	15%  	19%    	14%    	9% over Lab                       	
10 May 2009     	Populus/Times                         	34%  	25%  	6%   	20%    	14%    	9% over Lab                       	
8 May 2009      	YouGov/Sunday Times                   	36%  	25%  	7%   	20%    	13%    	11% over Lab                      	
4 May 2009      	ICM/TPA                               	32%  	28%  	9%   	22%    	8%     	4% over Lab                       	
8 January 2009  	YouGov/TPA                            	35%  	29%  	7%   	15%    	15%    	6% over Lab                       	
2004 Election   	2004 Election                         	26.7%	22.6%	16.1%	14.9%  	19.7%  	4.1% over Lab                     	
2009 Election   	2009 Election                         	27.7%	15.7%	16.5%	13.7%  	26.4%  	11.2% over UKIP                   	
I have reformatted the opinion poll table because it was completely inconsistent with the format of any other opinion polling table on Wikipedia. Also it does not work to group the Scottish Green Party and the Green Party of England and Wales as if it were one party in one column, this is statistically inaccurate, you can't simply add two percentages together from different parts of the country to give a national percentage, besides the fact they are not the same party.
I am all to aware that merging the columns for the 2 Green parties, BNP, SNP and Plaid into the others column has made the Others % rather large in a number of the polls. The thing is, that is the nature of proportional representation, people are more willing to look at smaller parties. The point is that no individual party within the "Others" column has polled within the margin of error of the Lib Dems, there is a cliff edge effect, this is more apparent when we look at the results and seat allocation. While the others column seems to be over represented and has a high %, it is not due to any one party being to big to be included, it is due to many parties gaining moderately small percentages of around 3-7% each!
This format is now consistent with that of Opinion polling for the United Kingdom general election, 2010 and Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election. It is also the format we will be using for opinion polling for the European Parliament election, 2014 (United Kingdom). The new format is more user friendly, tidier, colourful, statistically accurate and of course consistent with that used on other pages.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.133.12.45 (talk) 14:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree -- see my comments on the Talk page for the 2014 election. We should show what the polls say, not editorialise. Bondegezou (talk) 12:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Reformatted Opinion Poll table

message: Is anyone good with making graphs? We could do with a graph for the opinion polls, there aren't that many so it shouldn't take too long. You'd need to include a line each for the 4main parties. Using the data from the table on the main page, be sure to include the 2004 result at the beginning and the 2009 result at the end. Ideally it would be good if you could create the same type of graph as were using for the next general election. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hope someone can help, thanks. Nick Nick Dancer 07:30, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Opinion Polling Chart

message: There is talk on other pages of changing Nigel Farage's image. I just want to make sure that it does not extend to this page! The current image on this page is from 2008, any new images that are currently being talked about are from 2012 onwards. Since this page and election are from 2009 it is not apropriate to change the image. Thankyou.Sheffno1gunner (talk) 18:49, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nigel Farage Image 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on European Parliament election, 2009 (United Kingdom). 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 http://www.webcitation.org/5hNJUnxxO to http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=16340
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) 11:46, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on European Parliament election, 2009 (United Kingdom). 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:
*Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/5gsWfOmKo?url=http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Euro-MP-to-stand-down.5250407.jp with https://web.archive.org/web/20090514014121/http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Euro-MP-to-stand-down.5250407.jp on http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/newshome/Euro-MP-to-stand-down.5250407.jp
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=16340
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) 09:22, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on European Parliament election, 2009 (United Kingdom). 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=16340
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=16340
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721203915/http://www.eoni.org.uk/turnout_-_website-4.pdf to http://www.eoni.org.uk/turnout_-_website-4.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090617052538/http://populuslimited.com/uploads/download_pdf-280509-The-Times-The-Times-Poll---May-2009.pdf to http://www.populuslimited.com/uploads/download_pdf-280509-The-Times-The-Times-Poll---May-2009.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090612003254/http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2009_may_guardian_euro_poll.pdf to http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2009_may_guardian_euro_poll.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715104304/http://populuslimited.com/uploads/download_pdf-080509-The-Times-Times-Poll---May-2009.pdf to http://populuslimited.com/uploads/download_pdf-080509-The-Times-Times-Poll---May-2009.pdf
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) 03:04, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on European Parliament election, 2009 (United Kingdom). 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://www.webcitation.org/5hNJUnxxO?url=http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=16340 to http://www.chronicle.gi/headlines_details.php?id=16340
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090724154635/http://www.theparliament.com/no_cache/latestnews/news-article/newsarticle/british-tories-fight-it-out-for-leadership-of-new-eurosceptic-group/ to http://www.theparliament.com/no_cache/latestnews/news-article/newsarticle/british-tories-fight-it-out-for-leadership-of-new-eurosceptic-group/
*Added  tag to http://www.comres.co.uk/resources/7/Green%20Party%20Poll%20Results%20June09.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2009_may_suntele_euro_poll.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.comres.co.uk/systems/file_download.aspx?pg=441&ver=3
*Added  tag to http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2009_may_taxpayers_poll.pdf
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) 02:56, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is it 6,0 or 6,2 according to BBC it is 6,2 93.106.155.178 (talk) 09:38, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  BNP vote