Talk:2009 Norwich North by-election

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

Politics of the United Kingdom

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Date of poll

Is there a confirmation date for this by-election yet?

Not yet, no. BTLizard (talk) 10:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8125531.stm

(86.169.213.127 (talk) 21:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Ian Gibson could stand as an Independent.

I justed edited the candidates list, because I have a 'reliable source' that he COULD be an Independent here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/michaelcrick/2009/06/gibson_may_stand_as_independen.html (talk) 13:36, 28 June 2009 (UTC))[reply]

He could, but the table only lists confirmed candidates. Gibson is mentioned adequately in the paragraph above, and the Crick interview suggests that the chances of him standing as an independent are actually quite slim (less than 10% is mentioned at one point). — sjorford ++ 17:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Factual point

Factual point - Sewell ward is in Norwich not Broadland.

The above statement was added by User:Lostnorfolkboy but in doing so he deleted existing info so I reverted his edit and am now replacing his addition.PamD (talk) 22:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have amended article - Sewell was listed as both Broadland and Norwich, but the list of "nine" Broadland wards had ten entries, so I removed Sewell from Broadland list. PamD (talk) 22:47, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clumsy 'Analysis'

The analysis of the Green Party's performance in two wards seems irrelevant to me - surely their performance over the whole constituency is what matters? This whole section reads like propaganda by someone with a Green Party axe to grind, rather than encyclopeadic content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.236.44 (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I largely agree - the information on their Euro election performances seems relevant, and I've moved this up to the candidate section, as Read is standing again. I've removed the note on their performances in two wards, as this was unreferenced and could only be fairly presented as part of a larger commentary on local election results, covering Broadland and other parties. Warofdreams talk 09:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Start of count

Why didn't the count start when the polls closed? We often get results late the same evening. What is the reason it started instead the next day? -- Ralph Corderoy (talk) 07:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's cheaper to do it during the working day, rather than pay overtime. I do think it points to a lack of civic pride, though. BTLizard (talk) 09:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]