Talk:Hull University Labour Club

Appeal for Information
Hi,

Existing students of Labour Club (alongside some older alumni) are currently looking to find out more about our own history to be showcased at the end of next year. The project has only just started, but we have found some interesting information on the club in Hull archives, and through contact with old members, and we hope to take this forward with further interviews with previous members - both famous and not-so-famous - round about 2nd-26th September 2012.

The information we have on the club in the 1960s currently looks promising, but we're looking at considerable grey areas both before then, and afterwards into the 1980s/90s. However, I note that many of the edits to this page are not cited, and it's possible some of you are writing from your own memory, and have vital information which might be useful to us.

If anyone reading this wants to get further involved in the project, has some good information, or is even willing to give some time for an interview this coming September, please don't hesitate to email me at tcstephens1@gmail.com

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.114.195 (talk) 13:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion
I don't think this should be speedily deleted on the grounds that Cambridge and Oxford university labour clubs have wikipedia entries. Their entries merely consist of a history, what they do, famous alumni and the current executive, which is what this one includes. This club has been in existence for over half a century and more history will be added as it is researched. No personal accomplishments or actions are mentioned on the entry.

If this is to be deleted, then so should oxford and Cambridge's entries. If there is a difference between the oxbridge ones and this ones, please let me know and I will change it.

Yes - they're Oxford and Cambridge. And you're not.

That's just tory elitism.

Ref Improve tag
Hey. I just reinstated the Refimprove tag that someone from the uni removed recently. If ever an article needed a ref improve tag it's this one I'm afraid. Come on - there must be something out there in the archives that someone can find - in particular the claims that I've marked with citation needed are particularly in need of refs, as is the list of former members.

I've also done a spot of a rewrite and removed the list if current officers as it's essentially vanity unless any of them have any form of inherent notability. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:13, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

It is standard practice in this sort of article to include both a list of the current executive and format the 'former members' section the way it was before you decided it should change. See either Oxford or Cambridge's Labour, Conservative or Liberal Democrat articles for example. Also, the rewriting you have done is essentially pointless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.72.242.158 (talk) 02:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Is it standard procedure? Is there an agreed protocol or consensus on that? Tbh if the same is true of the Cam or Ox ones then I'd also remove it from there if there isn't an agreed proptolo on it -say through a wikiproject, just like I'd remove a list of school council members from a school page. Unless there's some form of notability about those people then it essentially becomes vanity doesn't it?


 * Thanks for the comment about the rewriting. Are you able to find any references to support anything at all about this society? Anything in reliable third party refs, preferably at a regional or better level? There must be a newspaper archive from the uni mustn't there? Ta Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:34, 17 May 2012 (UTC)