Talk:2022 North Lanarkshire Council election

2022 North Lanarkshire Council election is currently a Politics and government good article nominee. Nominated by Stevie fae Scotland (talk) at 20:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC) An editor has placed this article on hold to allow improvements to be made to satisfy the good article criteria. Recommendations have been left on the review page, and editors have seven days to address these issues. Improvements made in this period will influence the reviewer's decision whether or not to list the article as a good article. Short description: North Lanarkshire Council election

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance 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 Scotland Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:2022 North Lanarkshire Council election/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Stevie fae Scotland (talk · contribs) 20:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	a few suggestions below
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	I strongly recommend wikilinking to website/publisher names in the references. As a non-local, some confused me (e.g. at first I thought STV (TV channel) was a single transferable vote site) and it makes the reliability of sources more credible to the casual reader.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	The number of registered voters and turnout are given in the infobox, but these are not mentioned in the body. Is there a source for these figures? Is Andrew Teale a reliable source? It looks to be self-published, but is he an established and reliable subject-matter source? Similarly, is localcouncils.co.uk reliable? Again, for ballotbox.scot. It looks to be self published Electoral Reform Society is an advocacy group. The content that the reference is supporting is not contentious, but I recommend looking for an alternative source, if possible.
	2c. it contains no original research.	some content unsupported by references. Assuming an oversight, rather than OR
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	reworded what looked to be a close paraphrase from source
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	N/A
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	N/A
	7. Overall assessment.	On hold, pending responses to verifiability concerns

Prose review[edit]

• "The Greens named the same number of candidates as they at the previous election, contesting seven of the 21 wards." - You mention the number of candidates remaining the same without actually stating the number.
• Are the ward results in some sort of geographic order? That's fine if so (and I see it's the same order as the 2017 elections article), but I would have thought alphabetical order to be more natural.
• Fortissat result: "Labour (2) and the SNP (1) retained the seats they had won at the previous election while the BUP gained a seat from the Conservatives." In the tables, the British Unionist Party is shortened to British Unionist, not BUP. Can we make these consistent? (I'll leave to you to decide which is more appropriate)

Reference spot check[edit]

• Ref 2 N doesn't support "The election used the 21 wards created following the fifth statutory review of electoral arrangements conducted by Local Government Boundary Commission for Scotland in 2016, with 77 councillors elected"
• Ref 6 = paywalled
• Ref 7  Verified
• Ref 8  Verified
• Ref 14 N doesn't support "two Labour gains from the SNP"
• Ref 82 N The first preference percentage values for the Motherwell South East and Ravenscraig by-election differ from the source. How have these percentages been calculated?

Comment[edit]

I'll place the review on hold while @Stevie fae Scotland: considers my comments about content not supported by citations. Let me know if you have any questions about any of my comments. Adabow (talk) 08:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]