Talk:Kingston and Surbiton (UK Parliament constituency)

Honours in elections

I would use 'Sir Edward Davey' versus just 'Ed Davey' (for elections after 2015). Although the honours may not appear on the ballot paper, it seems to make sense on Wikipedia to take full account of their title. Unless someone can cite sources to the contrary? Matt 190417 19:54, 30 April 2017 (UTC) User:MB190417

Oppose, and I've reverted until there is a decision. I removed honours from all other constituency pages without opposition. It has NEVER been standard procedure to include honours in ballot boxes on Wikipedia. Whether that be Sir, Dame, CBE, OBE, MBE, or even Baron in the case of someone like George Foulkes in the Scottish Parliamentary elections. In fact, it seems apparent that they've only been included in seats that the LibDems are trying to win back from last time - notably Ed Davey, Simon Hughes and Vince Cable. I have not seem them used on Labour/Conservative defending pages, which suggests to be that there is an intention of political bias from the individual(s) who have inserted them in the first place. I have removed any that I have come across - it does not make any sense to include them given they are not at all relevant in elections and certainly not on the day of poll. It is standard procedure to include a simplified version of the name that would appear on the ballot paper i.e. no middle names. This has been common practice for some time now. --Jkaharper (talk) 16:57, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses the Statement of Persons Nominated, which never uses honours. That's enough for me doktorb _words^deeds 17:59, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kingston and Surbiton (UK 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://moderngov.kingston.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=76&RPID=13928422
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608193043/http://www.kingston.gov.uk/pe_-_sopn___nop-2.pdf to http://www.kingston.gov.uk/pe_-_sopn___nop-2.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100510045426/http://www.kingston.gov.uk/information/your_council/elections/results/election_results_2010/2010_election_results.htm?mgl=mgElectionAreaResults.aspx&XXR=0&ID=58&RPID=2415804 to http://www.kingston.gov.uk/information/your_council/elections/results/election_results_2010/2010_election_results.htm?mgl=mgElectionAreaResults.aspx&XXR=0&ID=58&RPID=2415804

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 00:32, 11 December 2017 (UTC)