Talk:Labour Party Members of Parliament in London
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article would be more useful if implemented as a sortable list, as in this crude demo:
| MP | Constituency |
|---|---|
| Harry Cohen | Leyton and Wanstead |
| Clive Efford | Eltham |
| Malcolm Wicks | Croydon North |
edGirl|(talk)]] • (contribs) 17:48, 6 November 2007 (UTC) It would also be better for the article name to define its scope, which appears to be for MPs elected in 2005. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:51, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
- It's much better now that it is a sortable list, but it the name "List of Labour Party Members of Parliament in London" still doesn't define the scope of the list. It should be renamed to List of current Labour Party Members of Parliament in London, or preferably List of Labour Party Members of Parliament in London, 2005- (which would require the addition of add Piara Khabra).
- However, the main purpose of this list seems at the moment to be as a list of links to websites, which breaches WP:NOT#LINK. The external links should be deleted, which would allow space on each row to include other more encyclopedic content, such as when the MP was first elected. As it stands, though, with two external links per row, this list looks like a clear case for deletion, which woukd be a pity. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Ho-hum, clearcase for deletion. See you around Jed keenan 15:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
- I have now removed the external links, in accordance with WP:NOT#LINK and Wikipedia:External links#Important_points_to_remember. As above, I think that this list serves an encyclopedic purpose, but that purpose cannot include being a list of weblinks.--BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)¶
- Ho-hum, clearcase for deletion. See you around Jed keenan 15:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- That is apart from the encyclopedic listing of wider refference source material but I ain't a barrister so arguing is no fun. Better to delete than be encyclopedic. Or maybe if I just listed refferences instead same difference but maintainable? Jed keenan 21:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- If you want to ref who is an MP for which constituency, party websites are not the best source. Better to use somewhere neutral, such the Parliament website. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- That is apart from the encyclopedic listing of wider refference source material but I ain't a barrister so arguing is no fun. Better to delete than be encyclopedic. Or maybe if I just listed refferences instead same difference but maintainable? Jed keenan 21:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:LabourLogo2007.gif
Image:LabourLogo2007.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
