Talk:List of former United Kingdom Parliament constituencies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of UK Parliament constituencies 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.UK Parliament constituenciesWikipedia:WikiProject UK Parliament constituenciesTemplate:WikiProject UK Parliament constituenciesUK Parliament constituencies 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.

Elections and Referendums

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

List creations as well?

Article looks like a well research sequence of dates. (I get a bit vague after 1918. Or do I mean 1832?) Wondering whether we can have also, in the same article, lists of creations. (This however would mean extending coverage to include currently existing constituencies.) Ideally creations would be listed alongside abolitions, in a separate column. Not sure how to do that arrangement myself. Laurel Bush 10:18, 20 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Dates of creation

I have started including dates of creation. Laurel Bush 11:48, 21 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

I like your new format - looks good. I'm unsure about listing creations alongside; it sounds like a good idea, but the article is going to be pretty large by the time its finished anyway. Otherwise, perhaps we could create a new article (List of Parliamentary constituencies in the United Kingdom by date of creation or something much snappier) for that information. Warofdreams talk 12:26, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Revived constituencies

I guess there have been two Armagh constituencies. The link now under 1885 is to an article about a constituency created in 1922 and abolished in 1983. Laurel Bush 11:51, 21 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

This has happened with quite a few constituencies. Except where the second constituency covers a completely different area to the first, people have been treating the second as a revival of the first - see, for instance, Sheffield Central (UK Parliament constituency). Warofdreams talk 12:26, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I note Sheffield Central (UK Parliament constituency) refers to the 1885 - 1950 period but offers little detail: eg no list of MPs. Seems to me that, at present, Sheffield Central (1885 to 1950) (UK Parliament constituency) should be (1) under 1950 and (2) a redirtect to Sheffield Central (UK Parliament constituency). (No mention in Armagh (UK Parliament constituency) of a constituency with that name predating 1922.) Laurel Bush 14:30, 22 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

- If I could jump in on the Armagh point (to clarify relevant developments I was involved in during the past year since the above posts), there has been a dispute about Irish constituencies. It was a vexed issue whether the constituency articles should be individual or combined articles for the same constituency used for different bodies. This particularly affected the areas now in the Republic of Ireland, but it had a knock on effect for Northern Ireland. I have lost touch with the debate in recent months, but the position now seems to be that the pre-1922 articles are being produced in the form Killarney (constituency) rather than Killarney (UK Parliament constituency). This coincides with the position I had reached for Northern Irish seats, continuing to use (UK Parliament constituency) for those seats which began or extended after 1922 and (constituency) for those which were pre-1922. You may note that now at the top of the page on Armagh (UK Parliament constituency) dealing with the 1922-1983 constituency there is a note and link which should take you to the Armagh (constituency) article dealing with (amongst other things) the 1801-1885 constituency. :For the pre-1801 Parliament of Ireland constituency, the 1801-1885 UK Parliament constituency and the 1921-1929 Northern Ireland Parliament division see Armagh --Gary J 01:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- I have altered the link for County Armagh, so it now goes to the right article. There should be an article covering every Irish seat in the UK Parliament, although many of them are just template type articles which are gradually being filled with useful information. I will try to go through the links in the next few days to check that everything goes to the right Irish article (some of the versions of constituency names differ as well as the confusion over article title suffixes I mention above. --Gary J 02:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fylde?

This list includes Fylde as being abolished. Should this not be the North Fylde/South Fylde seats? doktorb 11:30, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fylde was abolished in 1950 when the North and South Fylde seats were created. It has since been re-established. There are a few seats in this position. Warofdreams talk 11:35, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, I understand. Thanks for that doktorb 09:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Calais!

Calais claims that there used to be a Calais (parliamentary borough)! Morwen - Talk 20:58, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine any such constituency was effectively abolished long before the parliamentary union of Scotland with England, well before it was appropriate to talk of a parliament of the United Kingdom. Laurel Bush 09:33, 30 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Election returns show that Calais sent two members to the Parliament of England. Returns for the period are very incomplete, but they survive for 1545 and 1555, showing that as an absolute minimum, it was a parliamentary borough for that period of time. Laurel is absolutely correct that this isn't the place to list it, but it is all interesting stuff. Warofdreams talk 15:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- I have done a Calais (constituency) article and a Tournai (constituency) article, for the other English Parliament constituency on the European mainland. I have also thrown references to them in to the pre-Reform Act 1832 section of this article. If we are not going to mention the purely Parliament of England constituencies and treat this article as commencing with the Union of 1707, presumably to be consistent we should treat the creation date of the unreformed English and Welsh constituencies (for the purpose of this article) as 1707. If we are not going to do that I would suggest that the relatively small amount of pre-1707 material adds to this article and should be left in. The alternative is to do a new list of constituencies in the Parliament of England, indicating when they were enfranchised and when they were abolished. That list would overlap somewhat with this one. --Gary J 01:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article size

Thinking the article might need splitting - by some choice of date or dates. Laurel Bush 09:59, 30 September 2005 (UTC).[reply]

I agree, but it might be best to fill in more of the constituencies first so that we can make a better informed decision on how to split it. Warofdreams talk 11:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anglesey and Ynys Môn

Was Anglesey renamed Ynys Môn in 1983? I wonder. Or superseded by Ynys Môn? Laurel Bush 09:49, 10 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Since the constituencies have the same boundaries, I would say renamed. Morwen - Talk 10:09, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sligo

Not clear as to whether Sligo was abolished 1869 or 1870. Laurel Bush 13:17, 12 December 2005 (UTC).[reply]

The date of Sligo's disenfranchisement was 1 August 1870. --Gary J 02:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List completed!

I've finally completed the list. If there are any former constituencies not appearing on it, then either:

They are listed under a variation of their name (e.g. West Cornwall rather than Cornwall West)
I've considered that they were renamed rather than abolished (but may well be mistaken)
I've missed them off.

Please add them if they fall under points 2 or 3.

In addition, the list now needs to be divided up. 1832-1922 and 1945-present (pre- and post- creation of the Boundary Commissions) seems natural, but it might benefit from further subdivision. Any opinions? Warofdreams talk 15:04, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that Rugby constituency was abolished in 1983 and replaced with Rugby and Kenilworth. G-Man 21:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like #2. Would you like to add it? Warofdreams talk 21:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The constituency of Arundel & Shoreham was split in 1974 into separate constituencies of Arunel and Shoreham, with Arundel picking up a bit of Chichester to boot. I believe this should qualify as an abolition. --New Progressive 21:29, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like #2 again. Would you like to add it? Warofdreams talk 02:42, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what do we do about constituencies that undergo large changes, but retain the same name. For example, the pre-74 Chichester is significantly different from the post-74 Chichester. --New Progressive 21:29, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There have been a huge number of constituencies which have undergone large changes. I don't think that it is practical to include them in this list, although there could be scope for a separate article, and this point could be clarified in the intro to this article. The only exception to this, in my view, would be if the new constituency covered a completely (or almost entirely) different area, as in the Croydon South constituencies. Warofdreams talk 02:42, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Historical sizes

Do we have a list of the historical sizes of the Commons? This would be quite good. Morwen - Talk 19:33, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I found it - Number of British MPs However, this doesn't have anything pre-1918 - which would be nice. Morwen - Talk 19:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Splits' and 'revivals/reunions'

Leigh Rayment's Peerage Page is unreliable as a guide to boundary changes. Simple 'splits' are 'revivals/reunions' are unusual. Usually the boundaries of other constituencies are affected, and a 'revived' constituency may be very different from the original constituency. This is clear from a glance at the diagrams in F. W. S. Craig's Boundaries of Parliamentary Constituencies 1885-1972. Laurel Bush 11:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

"Simple 'splits' are 'revivals/reunions' are unusual." Something is wrong with this sentence. --VM 09:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that to work out the precise changes between redistributions would require a detailed examination for each seat, every time the boundaries were changed. If you look at the constituency articles, few have that level of detail. Even when the names of local government units comprising the constituency are known and seem to be much the same over time, they have also been affected by periodic boundary changes (which have been increasing in frequency in the last few generations).

To make this a manageable list I suggest we rely more on constituency names, than worrying too much about how the boundaries were drawn at any particular time. Such details as are available can be included in the constituency articles. A very good example is Chelsea (UK Parliament constituency) where I was able to set out the local government units and someone else was able to add some marvellous maps to demonstrate how the boundaries moved about over the course of time. I do not think we could usefully try to précis anything like that level of detail for a summary list.

What I have come up with is to refer to uses of the same constituency name (more or less) at different times as '1st creation' or '2nd creation'. This seems more useful than trying to check that the boundaries were broadly the same in both periods (particularly as it is perfectly possible to have substantial changes within a period when the same name was used, as when a small borough constituency was abolished in 1885 and its name was used for a new and much larger county division).

I am inclined to only add new notes about mergers and splits in clear cut cases. --Gary J 01:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wakerley (Northamptonshire)

I found this place at Sir Richard Cecil, MP (son of the 1st, brother of the 2nd and father of the 3rd Earl of Exeter - [1]). And I do not know if it is the constituency of his seat or the place where he lived. --VM 09:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a Parliamentary constituency. --Gary J 02:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with listing borough divisions and county compass-point name order

This discussion has now been transferred as suggested by Warofdreams --Gary J 01:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC) I have been going through this list and I notice that no consistent policy has been applied in two areas. I suggest we need a consensus, more perhaps for the purpose of this list than naming the constituency articles, rather than my taking a view and altering things on my own.[reply]

The first is whether the name of a borough, which is split into named rather than compass-point constituencies, should be prefixed to the specific name of the division. The most absurd anomaly I have come across is that the East Toxteth division of Liverpool is listed as 'East Toxteth' and the West Toxteth division is listed under 'Liverpool West Toxteth'. My inclination is to accept the specific name and only add the borough name in brackets if there is potential for confusion, e.g. Exchange (Liverpool) and Exchange (Manchester), or the specific name seems a bit too generic for a non-expert to easily relate it to a particular city such as Park (Sheffield). This suggestion has the advantage of being consistent with the way we have set out the names of county divisions and deals with the odd case where a constituency moved from being a county division at one redistribution to a borough one at another (Partick for example, a division of Lanarkshire in 1885 and of Glasgow in 1918).

The second problem is order of the compass-point and name for county divisions. Normally the official constituency name puts the compass-point first for county seats (and second for borough ones), such as East Dorset rather than Dorset East, but we have in the list examples of using both orders for different counties. I suggest that in compiling a list, it is easier for the user of the article to have the place name first. This wouls also promote consistency between county and borough seats, which is important since the Boundary Commission have recently done things like making one Reading seat a county and the other a borough constituency (with the compass point put in different places in the official constituency names). --Gary J 00:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There may be some errors, but this list should be based on the guidelines developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies. If you'd like to put something else forward, that'd be the best place to propose it. Warofdreams talk 03:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the guidance. I will look at the guidelines and see if I think they need changing. --Gary J 13:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does seem to me that in alphabetical lists it is best to have the place name first (using piping or redirects to link to other forms of names). Laurel Bush 13:39, 22 September 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Southend

Just created the page for Southend (UK Parliament constituency). However the creation date listed here doesn't seem to add up. It says 1918 but the article Rupert Guinness, 2nd Earl of Iveagh says he was elected to serve the constituency in 1912. Also from the list I can see representation of the area up until 1885 (when apparently Essex South was abolished) but there seems to be no constituency the area could be fitted into between 1885 and 1918. Can anyone help? MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 12:58, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article appears to be wrong. According to Leigh Rayment's excellent [2], Rupert Guinness, 2nd Earl of Iveagh was MP for Haggerston 1908-1910, for Essex Southeast 1912-1918 and for Southend 1918-1927: see http://www.leighrayment.com/peers/peersI.htm for a summary.

Hope this helps. --BrownHairedGirl ^{(talk) • (contribs)} 14:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Last MPs

Perhaps the names of the final MP(s) for an abolished constituency could be added to the lists? Some MPs' parliamentary careers have ended due to the abolition of constituencies, eg. Sheila Faith and Helen McElhone. Any thoughts? Dovea 16:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dispute Sheila Faith (having written her article); South Derbyshire would have selected her if she had been interested in having it, and she would have won it in 1983. I don't see much case for including the last MPs for a constituency in the list. Fys. Ta fys aym. 11:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]