Talk:Conservative Party (UK)

1. Redirect Template:Dated maintenance category

Request for comment on order of spectrum position

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Clear consensus for "Centre-right to right-wing" and months of inactivity. — GlowstoneUnknown, 15:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

---

In the article lede, should the Conservative Party be described as 'centre-right to right-wing', 'right-wing to centre-right', 'centre-right', or 'right-wing'? Will Thorpe (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

It seems odd to say the Conservative Party is 'centre-right to rightwing' but the Labour Party is 'centre-left'. It is also important to note that the Labour Party was not described on Wikipedia as 'leftwing' or leftwing' to 'far-left' but 'centre-left' when Corbyn was Labour leader. It does seem extremely inconsistent. 81.145.109.134 (talk) 09:42, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Discussion

• Right-wing as Centre-Right is part of the Right-wing spectrum. It's simpler just to use the broad term. TarnishedPath^talk 13:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  I think you might have misinterpreted the question, as this is about the order of the terms rather that which terms themselves. Nonetheless, it is useful to distinguish where on the political spectrum a party sits in accordance with the sources. — Czello ^(music) 14:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  There's no misinterpretation in TarnishedPath's comment, they simply looked at the question – Template:Teal – and found the options provided to be wanting. Cambial — foliar❧ 13:22, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Cambial Yellowing, precisely. It is always open to those participating in an RFC to arrive at answers outside of the defined set of the RFC question. TarnishedPath^talk 01:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

  Fair enough. — Czello ^(music) 11:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Anything more granular than "right-wing" is false precision. Policies, perceptions, points of comparison, &c., all vary and change. In general it is fair to say the party is right-wing. I think it is unhelpful to assign parties "centre-" and "far-" designations except where they use these terms themselves, since they often obscure both substantial policy overlaps and departures from strict orthodoxy. Regulov (talk) 13:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  I think that in common parlance there is a difference between 'right-wing' and 'right-of-centre'. Will Thorpe (talk) 05:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  I'd dispute that there is any differentiation in common usage. Anecdotal as it may be I generally see the terms used interchangeably. TarnishedPath^talk 01:51, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• I would agree - except that we describe the Labour Party as "sits on the centre-left of the political spectrum". So we would need to lose the center- if we wanted to avoid false precision there. Let's keep it simple - as has beeen said. But let's keep it consistent.Lukewarmbeer (talk) 14:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Centre-right to right-wing to have parity with other articles. — Czello ^(music) 14:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Right-wing so as to avoid false precision and to represent the broad spectrum of academic statements on the topic. Right-wing to centre-right is a second, inferior option. Cambial — foliar❧ 15:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Centre-right to right-wing. Both are cited, so this is therefore fair and balanced. It’s also consistent across Wikipedia that we state the position closest to the centre first. Helper201 (talk) 20:12, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Centre-right to right-wing is best, given that as far as I can gather 'centre-right' is the dominant and most apt description. 'Centre-right' on its own is a reasonable second option, with further elaboration later on in the lede. 'Right-wing' on its own would be the least ideal, unjustifiably separating the Conservative Party from other mainstream conservative parties like it in the Anglosphere; a false in-equivalence if you will. Cheers, Will Thorpe (talk) 06:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Centre-right to right-wing. Per what Helper201 and Will Thorpe said above 13:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC) Michaeldble (talk) 13:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Centre-right to right-wing per above Kowal2701 (talk) 22:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Centre-right to right-wing per WP:NPOV given the content of the article. -- DeFacto (talk). 11:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Right wing or right is the ideology of the political spectrum associated with conservative political thought. Anything more specific would be false precision and lose out from representing the ideology of some members/voters of the conservative party. Rigorousmortal (talk) 21:59, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

  'Right-of-centre' would be more acceptable. 13:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC) Will Thorpe (talk) 13:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Centre-right to right-wing As per the reasoning presented above. Hogo-2020 (talk) 08:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Right-wing as per stated above, secondary preference for Right-wing to centre-right. The argument that this designation "would seperate it from other parties in the anglosphere", and likewise for other appeals to consistancy, is an unencylopedic rational (and as such a kind of argument is advised against in WP:Othercontnent) Bejakyo (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

  Consistency is not to be disregarded, when there appears to be a patently different treatment or standard being applied to one article compared to its closest counterparts.

  I suspect you were referring to this essay, which states 'Trouble arises when legitimate comparisons are disregarded without considering the Wikipedia:Five pillars. ... Countering or dismissing someone's keep or delete argument by simply referring them to this essay is not encouraged.' Will Thorpe (talk) 13:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

  Of course an appeal to an (always specious) claim of consistency is not a valid argument. Political parties are different; they are characterised by sources differently; they are neither static nor monolithic. Whether a different article is judged by a small minority of editors to be mislabelled/whatever, has no bearing on the content of this article. If editors feel a different article falls down in some way, they should raise their concerns at that article’s talk page. We don’t seek to make other articles “also-and-equally wrong”. Cambial — foliar❧ 15:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

  No, but we seek to follow standards that allow for easy comparison, which is why these terms exist anyway. The argument for 'right wing' being the principal or only term is hollow; the phrase 'centre-right to right wing' carries a differentiation between the two which is well established and there is no apparent majority among scholarly or reliable sources for the latter term over the former – in fact, it seems quite the opposite. Will Thorpe (talk) 11:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

• Centre-right to right-wing as per the arguments above. Also, if it is too wordy, just centre-right (which is supposedly a subsection of "right-wing" anyway) would do as well. Str1977 ^(talk) 20:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Note to others: this !vote is evidently an example of Str1977 practicing what he refers to as "Template:Tq", due to his inability to deal with an unrelated conflict on a different article like an adult. Cambial — foliar❧ 10:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I commented on the substance of issue here (without even knowing your stance on it). Stop your childish "tu quoque". Str1977 ^(talk) 14:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

You will find that others treat you like an adult if you start behaving like one. Cambial — foliar❧ 18:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Read WP:NPA. Str1977 ^(talk) 20:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

What is this in relation to? — Czello ^(music) 16:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

• Centre-right to right-wing is the only correct way to display this. Paul Vaurie (talk) 07:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Note on closure

This ought to go without saying, but trying to close a narrow split of !votes with a supervote by pretending there is an overwhelming consensus is not an appropriate way to close a discussion of any kind. Cambial — foliar❧ 08:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

It may not be overwhelming, but a strong consensus is apparent and I'm willing to stake that won't change.

You stated in your edit description that it is a 7-6 consensus. This was a mis-count. Presently it's 9-5. Will Thorpe (talk) 11:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

At the time of that edit summary it was a 7-6 split of !votes, and thus the edit summary is accurate. I did not describe it as "consensus", as that term does not describe such a split. Two editors commented since (albeit one as, in their term, "Template:Tq") making it 9-6. Cambial — foliar❧ 13:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

9-5 it is. I counted a few times. I suspect you're counting @Lukewarmbeer as having voted in favour of the status quo despite their saying 'except'.

My apologies about mis-stating your edit description.

I'll also note that per the relevant page on RfCs they are typically closed after a month, so I will do this on the appropriate date if you have no objection. Cheers, Will Thorpe (talk) 13:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

As per that same page, RfCs typically run for those 30 days, rather than being removed after two weeks when the request's author believes the position to be favourable. Also per that page, with the possible exception of instances of WP:SNOW, they are not closed by the author of the RfC. Cambial — foliar❧ 13:41, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I would appreciate if you would not attack my motivations as I have sought to follow the process and have kept you informed of my actions. Glass houses.

Per WP:RFCEND, discussion should be closed 'as soon as it is clear the discussion has run its course' and 'may be withdrawn by the poster'. This is the first instance provided for how RfCs may be terminated. I will be closing the discussion now as there is a clear majority on this matter and the discussion has subsided now for twelve days, with no real prospect of any fundamental shift at this time. Will Thorpe (talk) 04:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Membership source

The reference for the historic membership figures possibly needs updating to point to this. The current reference just leads to an image of the contents page. See Organisation#Membership in the article, reference 277: McGuinness, Feargal (3 December 2012). "Membership of UK political parties" (PDF). House of Commons Library. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 April 2014. Retrieved 21 April 2014. Perhaps the reference should be replaced. TrottieTrue (talk) 23:35, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Kemi

Add section on the current leader. 2A0A:EF40:E49:CF01:4A69:45:5019:E703 (talk) 01:29, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2025

The number of Senedd members should be reduced to 15, as one of their MSs (Russell George) has been suspended following them being charged by police for gambling ooffences BBC News: Three Welsh Tories charged with betting offences --78.148.101.117 (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Is anyone going to handle this? 78.148.101.117 (talk) 16:16, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Never mind, I don't think I did it right. Hopefully I made the real request now --78.148.101.117 (talk) 21:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Yes check.svg Done: Thanks! Warriorglance(talk to me) 15:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2025 (2)

Change "are" to "were" at the start of the section on European affiliation, in International Affiliation, under Organisations. AmpersandBoroughCouncil (talk) 19:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

File:X mark.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jiltedsquirrel 🌰 ^{(talk || contribs)} 02:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

The Conservative Party no longer takes part in the European Parliament, due to Brexit, which is why I suggested changing "At a European level, the Conservatives are members of the European Conservatives and Reformists Party (ECR Party)" to "At a European level, the Conservatives were members of the European Conservatives and Reformists Party (ECR Party)". Hope this helps AmpersandBoroughCouncil (talk) 18:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Yes check.svg Done – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 15:03, 27 May 2025 (UTC)