User talk:Terry Randall

United Democratic Party
Whenever I try to edit something to show that the United Democratic Party has now been registered with the electoral commission and so replaces its defunct namesake formed in 1973 the edit gets removed and I don't know why. Any Ideas? Terry Randall (talk) 23:44, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The party does not have its own article on Wikipedia and does not past the general notability guidelines. Please see those guidelines for more information on what is notable and what isn't. —  Richard  BB  12:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Richard for that information on Notability but I don't see why it shouldn't pass. It is a genuine political party registered with the electoral commission. We have 2 websites visited by thousands of visitors. A book has been published called 'Laying a Ghost to Rest' which promotes the party and is available on Amazon etc. It is a party that may well be permanent and is in the process of preparing candidates for local and later national elections. It seemed to me that it at least needed to be distinguished from a what is now a defunct party that has previously used the same name. Nearly all the political magazines will have heard of the party even if breaking through into the mainstream is problematic. If this is not sufficient perhaps you explain why. thanks terry randall


 * Wikipedia relies on reliable sources; you have to show that the organisation has attracted sufficient independent coverage to be considered notable for the purposes of this encyclopaedia. You have provided no sources at all, and I have been unable to find any evidence that the group has been mentioned by anybody outside its (your) own website. The book you refer to appears to be self published, and has not been reviewed anywhere. So far, you have been able to offer no evidence whatsoever that this group actually exists. If you can provide this, it will still be necessary to establish that it is notable enough to warrant an article. In the absence of any of this, your edits will not be acceptable and an article will not be justified. RolandR (talk) 17:01, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Roland for your reply. We will endeavour to get sufficient coverage to justify an entry. However, I can't see why the party should not be listed in the list of British Political Parties. It is registered with the electoral commission which surely must be a reliable source. yours, terry randall


 * There are 398 political parties registered with the Electoral Commission. We have articles on only a fraction of these, which have established notability. Until the United Democratic Party does establish notability, there is no reason for us to treat it as any more significant than the similarly-recognised Restoration Party or Grumpy Old Men Party. RolandR (talk) 19:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Roland for that comment. I must only assume that you have little idea of what our party stands for or have looked at our websites if you try to equate us with Grumpy old men and Looney parties. I presume you will not be rushing to join us! yours,terry randall