Talk:Ealing Southall (UK Parliament constituency)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Ealing Southall (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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101106204053/http://www.boundarycommissionforengland.org.uk/electoral-figures/electoral-figures.htm to http://www.boundarycommissionforengland.org.uk/electoral-figures/electoral-figures.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150108053347/http://london.greenparty.org.uk:80/elections/2015-general-election.html to http://london.greenparty.org.uk/elections/2015-general-election.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
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) 19:53, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
Respectable analysis
[edit]I am trying to find 1) the right word and 2) best source for the sort of analysis that 'proves' this is a safe seat. There is of course no such thing as absolute proof as the term is a relative term. Please do assist. So far the best word I can think of is a phrase "robust academic". I do not wish to cite a newspaper for obvious reasons as to preferences and headline-grabbing all the time.- Adam37 Talk 12:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
- Newspapers are legitimate Wikipedia sources. doktorb wordsdeeds 13:23, 29 January 2017 (UTC)