Talk:1950 United Kingdom general election

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

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

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.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Churchill photo[edit]

Would be nice to have a photo of Churchill taken around 1950 rather than the current photo, which is dated 1941 when he looked around 30 years younger. Tempshill 17:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

have uploaded one found on the BBC site, of him addressing people! Hope it is of worth.

Media:Winston_churchill_1950_general_election.jpg

FeZzYwEzZy [Birth.Life.Death] - Do It All Or Die Trying... 10:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:1950 UK Election Map.png Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:1950 UK Election Map.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Labour lost a net 78 seats[edit]

Labour lost a net 78 seats, as listed in a couple of places in the article. They did not lose only the seat of Bexley. For some reason, an anonymous user who is generally making sensible contributions keeps adding the plainly wrong claim that they lost only the Bexley seat to the table. Please stop doing this! Warofdreams talk 09:55, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clement Davis image in infobox[edit]

The non-free use of File:Clement Davies c1955.jpg was discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 March 30#File:Clement Davies c1955.jpg and the result was "keep in Clement Davies, remove all other instances." For clarification or to challenge this close please contact the closing administrator per WP:CLOSECHALLENGE. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:45, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on United Kingdom general election, 1950. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20151208092654/http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/05/liberal-democrats-face-soaring-fines-for-failing-to-win-enough-votes/ to http://blogs.new.spectator.co.uk/2015/05/liberal-democrats-face-soaring-fines-for-failing-to-win-enough-votes/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

when ? who ?[edit]

the fifth sentence of the introduction is

Labour called another general election in 1951.

Who was the driving force ? (Attlee ?) Who (person, board or body) took the decision in the end ? --Neun-x (talk) 16:26, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Colours?[edit]

We see 8 colours on the map/house of commons composition but only 3 parties are given seats in the results. Who are the missing colours? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:6E00:1E17:B001:2239:56FF:FE8D:DDB2 (talk) 02:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction between article and illustrations[edit]

Per the comment by the IP poster in October 2021 above, there is a difference between the composition of the Commons shown in the article and the composition shown in the illustrations accompanying the article. I'm presuming that this has occurred because the article has consolidated various Conservative-linked parties in Scotland and Northern Ireland into the total number of Conservative seats, but without a matching consolidation occurring in the preparation of illustrations. Is there a consensus for how this is handled in other general election articles? XAM2175 ^(T) 21:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]