This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Surely the figures for the Whigs are including those for the Irish Parliamentary Party's predecessory (whose name escapes me; 1835 predates the Home Rule League)? I'm not sure that they were officially a part of the Whigs at any point… — OwenBlacker 12:29, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
The grouping were pretty fluid, and I can't find any sources which differentiate the Nationalist vote/seats from the Whig tallies - note that it also doesn't separate out the Radicals. If you can find a source which does, please add the information! Warofdreamstalk17:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Parliamentary Election Results in Ireland 1801-1922 explains that there was an electoral pact between the Whigs (who Walker calls Liberals from 1832) and the Repealers for this election. Although it would be possible to calculate totals for the candidates Walker designated Liberal (Repealer), it seems a bit pointless. I did use the seat totals for the Repeal Association article, but I did not bother with vote totals.
Craig's calculations, on which our general election results are based (which incorporates Walker's Irish figures), seem to me to be as good as we are going to get. Before 1859 there is a mass of more or less allied Whig, Radical, Reformer, Liberal and various Irish candidates, which compilers of election results combine in one category be it Whig or Liberal. I am not aware that anyone has undertaken the massive task of examining every individual in these categories to try to group them more precisely in aggregate tables. From about 1859 the most important single fact about a politician was which party he belonged to. Very few of them were not clearly associated with one organisation. This was not the way things worked in the more fluid politics before that time, so it seems to me that we should accept the traditional approach of having a category for a broad tendency and not trying to sub-divide further. --Gary J (talk) 12:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}