Wikipedia

Talk:Opinion polling for the 2014 Scottish independence referendum

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

ICM/Scotsman 16/09/2014

edit
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

I have removed this poll for now until ICM publish their figures; this should be tomorrow morning 17/09/14. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.36.64 (talk) 23:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

I may be wrong, but I believe that the weighted percentages are presented as the final polling results. This means the recent addition uses the wrong pre- weighted sums (Yes 40%/ No 46%/ Undecided 14%), and have edited to include the weighted percentages. If I am wrong please change back and inform me of my error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.39.36.64 (talk) 14:17, 17 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Opinion polling after the referendum

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I propose moving this to the public opinion section of the main Scottish independence article. I think this article should concentrate on the polling in the lead up to the referendum that happened on 18 September 2014. Theoretically if the Scottish independence polling was to be held in this article it would give undue weight to polling that didn't actually have anything to do with the 2014 referendum. I think it makes more sense to have it in the Scottish independence article where you can see a basic summary of this article, then any polling subsequent to the referendum. If a second referendum was to happen (as in Quebec) then the polling between 18 September 2014 and then would be moved there. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 23:44, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

"Wee Blue Book" on timeline

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I suspect this has been added due to this article on the Wings over Scotland site. I don't think this "event" should be entered in the timeline, mainly because it isn't an article in its own right. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 11:08, 18 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I can see no reason why it's not "an article in its own right". It's an entry like any other about a legitimate subject, and I'm not sure you get to be the arbitrary judge of whether entries may or may not have been created for reasons you dislike. A substantial book funded by public subscription which had hundreds of thousands of copies distributed across the country certainly seems a notable event by any reasonable interpretation. I'd be prepared to wager that The Wee Blue Book was read by vastly more people than (for example) the Strathclyde Commission report, which you don't appear to have raised any objection to being included in the timeline.
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Opinion polling for the Scottish independence referendum, 2014. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:42, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 23 external links on Opinion polling for the Scottish independence referendum, 2014. 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: 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) 22:57, 9 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Opinion_polling_for_the_2014_Scottish_independence_referendum&oldid=1234723353"