Template talk:United Kingdom elections

message: Number 57 quite properly reverted my edits to the template; I had, embarrassingly, missed the 1975 entry. However, the reason I removed the markup on 2011 was because "Further Welsh powers" wasn't italicized. Shouldn't the markup usage be consistent across the two entries? YLee (talk) 15:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Although, TBH, I am somewhat wary of the Welsh one, because although it is part of the government programme, a date still hasn't been set... пﮟოьεԻ 57 19:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further Welsh powers 

message: Probably a good idea for this template to repeat Referendums in the United Kingdom#Major referendums rather than have different criteria. MRSC (talk) 18:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can  be drawn into a discussion on this? MRSC (talk) 05:26, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I made my comments in the edit summary section. The list you refer to is clearly WP:OR. Really, the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish referendums should not be on here either as they are not national across the UK, and are on the relevant templates for those countries. пﮟოьεԻ 57 08:09, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for talking. Perhaps we could remove them and create a devolution template? The NEE and London referendums are part of that process. MRSC (talk) 09:54, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly, although the London one already exists on , so I'm not sure whether one would be useful. пﮟოьεԻ 57 10:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can definitely see the value in keeping the devolution stuff in one place. MRSC (talk) 11:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Sync with list

message: I updated this template with a new look. It should be more presentable now. RGloucester (talk) 01:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, this looks awful. Why should this template be any different to the standard navbox format that almost all other election templates are formatted with? Number 57 08:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated 

message: Should the template be updated to include a link to the recent PCC elections? 82.22.71.26 (talk) 11:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCC elections 

message: This is basically the same situation as above, I think. User:Number 57 is trying to impose some pointless "standard" on the template, by edit-warring against others who want to make a simple change that obviously improves its usefulness. Is there any chance we can settle this trivial matter without another unnecessarily long argument? There is plenty of room in the "referendums" line to include information about what the referendums were about, which is obviously much more meaningful to people than the years in which they took/will take place. What on earth is the point of deleting that information? If the only reason is "to conform to a standard", then I suggest that this is no reason at all. W. P. Uzer (talk) 12:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverting two separate users and asking people to respect WP:BRD is not edit warring. The template is a simple navigation template for displaying years of elections and referendums. It is far better to keep it simple – not everything has to be explained on the template. I hope you will appreciate that consistency is also a key facet of Wikipedia. Number 57 14:12, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Adding obviously helpful information in a place where there is obviously plenty of room for it is not in any way contradictory to "keeping it simple". In what way will any reader be helped by the removal of this? W. P. Uzer (talk) 08:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see why the addition of the words is "obviously helpful" as hovering over the links shows the title of the article anyway. Wikipedia needs to have a consistent layout and this is part of that process. Number 57 09:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Explaining the referendums

message: When did Akhumzi did his grade 12 at Winile secondary school? ZEEnhle (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Akhumzi jezile 

message: Would it be worth putting a note to say that there were local elections scheduled for 2020, but these were cancelled. 2020 United Kingdom local elections is a redirect to 2021 United Kingdom local elections so I am not sure if it would be helpful to have it in the template or not. Dunarc (talk) 23:54, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so. Elections are regularly postponed around the world (including many due to covid), and we just link to the year they actually happened. Cheers, Number 57 00:10, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough - I think anyone looking would work out what happened fairly easily from the 2021 article in any case. Thanks Dunarc (talk) 23:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  2020