Template talk:Current UK MP

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This set of individuals, is I feel, too big to have useful sideways linking. Can anyone point to sidelinking with a template with half as many things as this? Morwen - Talk 15:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed - isn't this done much better by Category:British MPs or List of British MPs or MPs elected in the UK general election, 2005?

I applaud the boldness of the creator of this template, but it adds a massive and distracting block of text of marginal utility to the article for each and every MP. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

If you feel this way, put it up for deletion and let's vote on it. Philip Stevens 17:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, a couple of us have explained out reasons against it: perhaps you could let us know why you think we need this template.

I note that you have been doing little else but add it all afternoon, even after replying to these comments: are you using a bot? -- ALoan (Talk) 17:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry Philip, I'm afraid I'm going to have to join the dissenters. I just think it's far too big (and would have to be even bigger in a more readable font size) to be useful. Hunting through it to find, say, Rob Marris would be a pain. While I can see that this took a heck of a lot of work (as adding it to 600-odd articles will be), but perhaps you'd better "hold fire" with it for now, until there's been a discussion about it. --RFBailey 18:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, it would be a relatively talk for a bot to add it to or remove it from a list of articles, but we ought to discuss it first. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd prefer to develop a conensus rather than go right to a pseudovote. I think that yes, this is too big a sidewayslinkbox, and categories do this much better. Even the constituencies don't have this : but have a per-region sidewaysbox. I'm not even sure I'd see the value in a pre-region sidewayslinkbox for MPs, mind. Morwen - Talk 21:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Doing this by region wouldn't make sense. The only sensible split (as far as I can see) would be by party, but even this (for Labour/Conservative anyway) would still be far too big. --RFBailey 21:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

By region might work - why wouldn't it make sense? What size of region? European Parliament constituency would also be too large. County? We could also get links to the constituencies in, if each template was small enough. -- ALoan (Talk) 21:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Doing constituencies by region makes sense because they're geographical areas. But once in the House of Commons, there are various ways MPs could be grouped, which are not affected by where their constituency is, such as membership of Select Committees, being a private secretary, being a minister, or being a spokesperson for a particular issue. Splitting by party would make the most sense for this reason, but for the two largest parties this would still leave ridiculously large templates. --RFBailey 11:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Insanely big - swamping most of the articles. Just remove it. --Henrygb 22:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there a way to put the hidden tab on the same line as the party name? This would make it smaller. Philip Stevens 06:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I doubt that'll make any different my friend, trimming 4 lines isn't going to decrease the size of a template with hundreds of links. Aaрон Кинни (t) 21:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Speaker

I moved the Speaker to Others; while he was a Labour MP, he is now non-party.--Brownlee 12:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)