Talk:2022 Glasgow City Council election

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:37, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

Passed. DimensionalFusion (talk) 07:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2022 Glasgow City Council election/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: DimensionalFusion (talk · contribs) 10:07, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On a cursory glance, article seems to be long enough and doesn't seem to meet quickfail criteria. Looks interesting!

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    No issues with prose, SPaG is correct
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    Article broadly complies with MoS, and is consistent with other UK and Scottish election pages. No MoS violations that I can see, no double links
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    All references are listed in the references section
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    All citations are inline. Citation check:
    For review:
  • Local Elections Archive Project - It's cited 5 times but it looks a little sketchy
  • Ballot Box Scotland - Honestly it looks like a random guy's blog
  • Glasgow City Council - Citing GCC themselves goes a little close to WP:OR but I think it's acceptable in the cases where it's used, mostly just for the actual results
  1. All other citations look fine, no worries
    Citation issues addressed ^
    C. It contains no original research:
    All claims are cited inline.
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    After running the article through a plagiarism detector, I cannot see any evidence of copyright violations nor plagiarism (that isn't circular or a generic phrase)
  2. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    Article addresses all appropriate areas of the election
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
    Article does not go into unnecessary detail.
  3. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    No concerns here, article doesn't show bias towards any particular party.
  4. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    Article is stable, no edit warring as far as I can see
  5. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    All 3 images are correctly tagged with the correct copyright status
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    All images are relevant to the topic at hand and are captioned correctly
  6. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Article meets all GA criteria.
@DimensionalFusion: Hey, just wondering how you were getting on with this. I should have time over the weekend to look over any comments and fix any issues. Thanks, Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 10:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi yes, just finishing up now. Just a quick follow up question though, why does only the council leader have a photo when all the councillors photos are available on the glasgow city council website? Thanks
@Stevie fae Scotland DimensionalFusion (talk) 19:27, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated, thank you. When I prepared the article back in September, I was unfamiliar with Crown Copyright and the Open Government Licence so I was not going to upload any photos that I wasn't sure we would be able to use. I've looked into it more recently and I understand how it works now. Not all councils subscribe to the Open Government Licence (East Ayrshire don't for example), Glasgow City Council do (there's more info on their website) so I would be happy to upload the others now that I know what I'm doing. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DimensionalFusion: Photos added with appropriate licence details and captions. Regarding the sources you've mentioned above, both are run by experts in their field and they have been cited by multiple reliable sources. Ballotbox Scotland is run by Allan Faulds and his recent citations include [1] [2] [3] [4] and [5]. The Local Elections Archive Project is run by Andrew Teale and his work has been cited by both the New Statesman and the BBC. If there's anything else, let me know. Thanks, Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 20:52, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Stevie fae Scotland Awesome, thanks DimensionalFusion (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 08:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Stevie fae Scotland (talk). Self-nominated at 09:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2022 Glasgow City Council election; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Promoted to GA on March 12, so is new enough. Hook is interesting and inline cited to the Glasgow Times, which is RS. No image and no QPQ needed. Article is long enough and NPOV. Earwig returns 4.8% (Violation Unlikely). Seems good to me! Chetsford (talk) 02:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2022_Glasgow_City_Council_election&oldid=1218881204"