Talk:Glasgow Govan (UK Parliament constituency)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Labour Gain 1955?[edit]

Is it fair to say it was a Labour gain in 1955 as the boundaries of the seat were heavily redrawn and much of the 1950-55 version of Govan ended up in the new Craigton seat which Jack Nixon Browne moved to (and won)? Dunarc (talk) 15:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Glasgow Govan/Govan[edit]

This article does not reflect the fact the seat was not called Glasgow Govan until 1918. Prior to that it was the Govan division of Lanarkshire. Govan was not incorporated into the city of Glasgow until 1912. Therefore the article should reflect this. Indeed there might be a case for a seperate Govan (UK Parliament constituency) Article covering the pre-1918 results. Dunarc (talk) 17:05, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article covers the results over that period so that's adequate enough doktorb wordsdeeds 19:07, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Glasgow Govan (UK Parliament constituency)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "craig1885":

  • From East Aberdeenshire (UK Parliament constituency): Craig, FWS, ed. (1974). British Parliamentary Election Results: 1885-1918. London: Macmillan Press. ISBN 9781349022984.
  • From Glasgow St Rollox (UK Parliament constituency): Craig, FWS, ed. (1974). British Parliamentary Election Results: 1885-1918. London: Macmillan Press. p. 508. ISBN 9781349022984.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 03:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]