Talk:South West England (European Parliament constituency)

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

Ashley Fox[edit]

Is the third on the Conser4vative list Ashley Peter FOX the Bristol City Councillor? ([1]) Vernon White . . . Talk 18:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

name incorrect[edit]

It s named 'South West England and Gibraltar'. 03:25, 15 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.49.136.87 (talk)

Avon[edit]

Avon no longer exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.123.182 (talk) 23:26, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Christians[edit]

Is the list of party lists really correct? i.e. the Christian Party is standing twice in the same election, once on its own and once in coalition with the CPA? ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.125.185 (talk) 21:39, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks to the Editors who have provided the results of the 4 June Election Vernon White . . . Talk 10:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Population[edit]

The South West England page gives the population as 4,928,458 (not including Gibraltar) not the 3,998,479 given on this page. Is it a mistake or something else? --Abc26324 (talk) 07:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's the electorate population. PS all the references about Julie Girling should go on the article Julie Girling and not on this page. Jolly Ω Janner 14:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The West Country Challenge[edit]

Would you like to win up to £250 in Amazon vouchers for participating in The West Country Challenge?

The The West Country Challenge will take place from 8 to 28 August 2016. The idea is to create and improve articles about Bristol, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, Dorset, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire, like this one.

The format will be based on Wales's successful Awaken the Dragon which saw over 1000 article improvements and creations and 65 GAs/FAs. As with the Dragon contest, the focus is more on improving core articles and breathing new life into those older stale articles and stubs which might otherwise not get edited in years. All contributions, including new articles, are welcome though.

Work on any of the items at:

or other articles relating to the area.

There will be sub contests focusing on particular areas:

To sign up or get more information visit the contest pages at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge.— Rod talk 16:32, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on South West England (European Parliament constituency). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:26, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 May 2019[edit]

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.


South West England (European Parliament constituency)South West Region (European Parliament constituency) – It's officially 'South West'[3][4] or 'South West Region'[5][6][7][8][9] and of the European constituency articles this is the only one where part of the region (Gibraltar) is not included in the article name. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - current name offers clarity, and means the article is recognisably about an English constituency and not one elsewhere in the EU. It is also consistent with similarly named English and Italian EU constituencies (see Template:European Parliament constituencies 2019–24), as per WP:CRITERIA. Without the country, they would become ambiguous and confusing titles, which is the opposite of their purpose (regardless of their official name). Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 15:16, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your proposal does not reduce the length of the title by even one character, but it does reduce precision. Why on earth do you want to do that? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:18, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • These two proposals reduce the title by 8 characters and 28 characters respectively. See Wikipedia:Article titles#Precision: 'titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that.' These titles are unambiguous and therefore should be selected over unnecessarily longer ones. Even the suggested target which is only one character less than the current one [and, yes 'Region' is one less character than 'England'], is no more or less precise than the present one. They can both only refer to one topic and one topic only. There are no other European Parliament constituencies with the name South West Region. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:45, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The claim that "South West Region" is no less precise than "South West England" is the sort of utter nonsense that sometimes make me think that Wikipedia is a doomed social experiment which will self-destruct because it has gives a license to some people to play games for their own amusement.
I try to keep my faith in the project as a whole by reassuring myself that such nonsense usually doesn't prevail ... but it is a form of organisational madness that allows time to be wasted by debates in which purveyors of such absurdities are not simply shown the door. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think the people who should be 'shown the door' are those who are unnecessarily rude and aggressive. I'm not playing games for my own amusement or purveying an absurdity. You have confused recognisability with precision but they are different criteria at Wikipedia:Article titles. Note that I didn't argue with Gaia's comment about recognisability because that was a valid comment that understands that criterion, but precision within the meaning of the guideline doesn't mean what you think it means. All four names are as precise as each other because they all refer and can only refer to one thing. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:29, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gibraltar isn't in England. There are at least 7 sources over the entire period of the constituency's existence (from 2003 to date) linked in this discussion. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:29, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - The official name of the region is South West England. Changing to South West Region, is patently confusing. It could mean any country in the European union from Poland to Latvia to Spain or Romania. The clarifier of England is essential in avoiding unnecessary confusion and retaining consistency among other UK regions for the European Parliament. This is distinction is being asked for to solve an issue which does not exist. 2.25.207.66 (talk) 08:40, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It isn't the official name, and I've provided citations to prove it. Celia Homeford (talk) 08:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I propose this be closed under WP:Snowball. There is little appetite for this change to be made, this proposal is not going to gain consensus to be made and should not be taking up any more of anyone time unnecessarily. It is clear the consensus is to oppose this change. 2.25.207.66 (talk) 19:45, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It's been open long enough and consensus is clearly Oppose. doktorb wordsdeeds 19:51, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]