Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Timeline of Brexit/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 12:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Timeline of Brexit

edit

Timeline of Brexit (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 15:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(This is my first FL nomination in over four years, so I hope the process hasn't changed that much since then...) I've been working on this list for a few months now, and, following a peer review from User:Llewee, I now feel that it is worthy of the bronze star. The structure of the article is largely based on Timeline of the Manhattan Project, currently a FL. I welcome any and all feedback. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 15:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by RunningTiger123

edit

Overall, this is pretty solid – sources seem good (though this isn't a formal source review) and most of it is well-written. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:02, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review, RunningTiger123! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 11:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only major issue is the capitalization of "Prime Minister" in a few captions. I also disagree that EU and UK should be abbreviated in the lead – since both are key to this article, it's especially important to ensure readers know what they are – but if the MOS disagrees, so be it. I'll trust that the edits get made and support now. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Now done. Thanks for the support, RunningTiger! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:41, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
MyCatIsAChonk
  • After negotiations throughout 2020, on 24 December the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement was announced - reverse second clause; "After negotiations throughout 2020, the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement was announced on 24 December..."
  • As of 2023, the broad consensus of economists is that leaving the EU has had a substantially negative effect on the UK's economy, which is expected to be several percentage points smaller than it would have been if it had remained in the bloc. - this is contentious, add some citations to back it per WP:WHENNOTCITE
  • Wl Eurosceptic, 2015 general election, and Bloomberg speech first time outside of lead
  • 10 November: use Tusk's full name and title, and wl
  • 9 June: The ITV Referendum Debate, a live TV debate on Brexit, is broadcast by ITV - nothing on the participants or results of the debate? same for 21 June: EU Referendum: The Great Debate is broadcast live from Wembley Arena on BBC One. With 6,000 people in the audience, it is the largest televised debate on the issue
  • 5–8 December: The Supreme Court convenes to hear the government's appeal against the High Court ruling. For the first time ever, all 11 judges sit en banc to hear the case - the first time in the history of the supreme court, or the first time for that particular group of judges? Clarify
  • 22 May: Following a backlash to the proposed reforms, May announces that an "absolute limit" on the amount of money that a person would have to pay for social care. - this sentence may just be not clicking with me, but don't you mean "May announces that an 'absolute limit' would be placed on the..."
  • Wl prorogues

A Thousand Doors, I'm impressed to say that's all for such a long article. That was one hell of a read- as an American, I wasn't too aware of the exact timeline of Brexit, so this was an enlightening read. Excellent work! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 02:26, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your review, MyCatIsAChonk! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 14:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - lovely work! By the way, if you get time, I'd appreciate any comments at this FLC. Thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:56, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Source review

Pretty solid work! For the delegates:

  • Earwig not working for me, assuming WP:AGF
  • No spot checks performed.

Thats all, nothing much to add. The references are consistently cited, and looks fine on reliability! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the source review, Kavyansh.Singh! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 17:45, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. Pass. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:20, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for your source review, Kavyansh.Singh. If you have the time, would you perhaps be willing to provide a full review of the list against the FL criteria, please? I think the article's quite close to being promoted, it just needs one or two more reviews. Only if you have the time, of course. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 11:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Goldsztajn

edit

Mostly focussing on the image captions, in general, they need more context. An observation, the use of full names without titles in the captions I think makes the captions somewhat informal.

captions
edit
  • "The signing of the Maastricht Treaty (pictured) on 7 February 1992 began the formal establishment the European Union." -> "The Maastricht Treaty (pictured), signed on 7 February 1992, legally established the European Union." (ambiguous in the first version: is it the treaty or the signing of the treaty being pictured? I don't feel formal is the correct word here).
  • "David Cameron (left) and Nick Clegg (right), pictured in 2015" -> "Prime Minister Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg in February 2015, during the period of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government"
  • "David Cameron delivering the Bloomberg speech on 23 January 2013" -> "Prime Minister Cameron's Bloomberg speech on 23 January 2013, when an in-out referendum on EU membership was first promised."
  • "Ed Miliband speaking on Labour's foreign policy on 24 April 2015" -> "Labour leader Ed Miliband criticised government foreign policy, including the handling of the EU referendum, in a speech two weeks before the 2015 general election."
  • "The front cover of the pro-EU leaflet" - this caption needs more context - it should be identified as an official Government publication. Eg, the image description is better: "The front cover of the 2016 EU leaflet, sent to UK households by the British government in April 2016"
  • "Boris Johnson speaking at Chatham House on 2 December 2016" -> "Boris Johnson, who supported the Vote Leave campaign from the backbench, speaking at Chatham House on 2 December 2016"
  • "Theresa May's letter to Donald Tusk, officially invoking Article 50" -> Prime Minister Theresa May's letter to President Donald Tusk, invoking Article 50, indicating the UK's intention to leave the EU.
  • "Arlene Foster (left) and Theresa May (right), pictured in 2016" -> DUP leader Arlene Foster's support to Prime Minister Theresa May following the 2017 election produced the Conservative–DUP agreement.
I'd suggest adding a protest photo from the remain side, given the celebration photo at the end. Possibly this one from 2017 outside the Conservative Party conference.
Text
edit
  • "The below timeline is a history of Brexit following the Bloomberg speech." This sentence feels redundant, could be dropped. Also, if the timeline follows the Bloomberg speech, then the Bloomberg speech shouldn't be in the timeline, rather the timeline *starts* with the Bloomberg speech.
  • "In a speech on Labour's foreign policy, Miliband warns that a referendum on an "arbitrary timetable" hazards the UK's place in the EU." The sources here don't suppport this claim, the text appears to sythesise language from one to the other. The Economist confirms that he gave the speech and reports that Milliband criticised Cameron for being weak before Tory Eurosceptics ("Cameron’s craven concessions to Tory Eurosceptics had hazarded the country’s place in the EU"). From the speech itself, Miliband mentions the arbitrary timetable as part of a broad set of problems related to the EU referendum, among other things, but he's using this to criticise Tory foreign policy in general as threatening the UK's place in the world.
  • 15 December: "The EU announces that "sufficient progress" has been made in the first phase of Brexit negotiations, and that talks can now move on to the second phase." replace "now move on" with "proceed"

Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 03:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, Goldsztajn! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 09:42, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up on captions
edit

@A Thousand Doors: Thanks for the changes to the captions, gives a much better context. Some follow up.

  • Regarding MOS:PEOPLETITLES, you've somewhat cherry picked the quote, the full sentence reads: "Aside from mentioning them in the lead sentence of a biographical subject's own article, only use titles where they are necessary for clarity or identification in the context." This is not a biogrpahy. I think the most resonable thing here would be in the first instance of an image showing a subject, they should be included with their title and full name, with subsequent images using just their surname. So, "Prime Minister David Cameron (left) and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (right) in February 2015, during the period of the Cameron–Clegg coalition" and "David Cameron delivering the Bloomberg speech on 23 January 2013, when an in-out referendum on EU membership was first promised[22]".
  • "Labour leader Ed Miliband criticised government foreign policy...", "David Cameron announcing his resignation as prime minister on 24 June 2016" etc.
  • "Thousands gather in Parliament Square to celebrate the moment that the UK officially leaves the EU at 23:00 on 31 January 2020" I find this caption straying somewhat away from NPOV, especially in the broader context that hundreds of thousands of people protested on both sides throughout this period. As an alternative, I'd suggest: "Crowds gather in Parliament Square to mark the UK's official departure from the EU as of 23:00 GMT on 31 January 2020."
  • "Boris Johnson negotiating a UK–EU trade deal over the phone with Ursula von der Leyen on 7 December 2020" the source does not indicate the photo depicts Johnson negotiating, unnecessary to mention he's on the phone. Better to state: "Johnson speaking with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at the time of the UK–EU trade negotiations, 7 December 2020."

Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 02:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@A Thousand Doors: thank you for the reminder ping. I've got a few more comments, will come back to you within 24 hours. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One quick follow up - re: the image of Johnson on the phone, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Alternative text for images - this kind of information should be conveyed via the alt text parameter. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 22:20, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, done. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 09:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Goldsztajn: Just want to give you another nudge about this, whenever you've got a moment. Thanks, A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Follow-up on lede
edit

@A Thousand Doors: apologies for my longer than expected delay. Some more comments.

  • First sentence, first appearance of "European Union" should be followed by "(EU)".
  • "As of 2020, the UK is the only sovereign country to have left the EU." This could imply that a non-soverign country has left. Would probably be better to state "As of 2023, the UK is the only member state to have left the EU."
  • "Britain's membership of the EU began on 1 January 1973" - this is not correct, Britain's membership in the EU dates from 1 November 1993, when the provisions of the Maastrict Treaty come into force.
  • I would suggest rewording this part as: "With Britain's entry into the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973, the predecessor to the EU, Eurosceptic groups unsuccessfully challenged Britain's membership in a 1975 referendum." (It's not correct to state Eurosceptic groups formed after entry, Eurosceptic groups predate the UK's membership in the EEC).
  • It's somewhat of a large jump here, a bridging sentence is needed. Suggeston: "Despite this loss, opposition to membership continued in subsequent decades, particularly, but not exclusively, from elements of the Conservative Party."
  • Shorten next sentence as: "In January 2013, Prime Minister David Cameron promised an in–out referendum on EU membership if the Conservative Party won a majority at the 2015 general election."
  • Shorten and clarify next sentence as: "As a result of securing a majority, a bill to hold a referendum was introduced in May 2015."
  • "In February 2016, Cameron announced the date of the referendum as 23 June that year." Drop campaigning mention.
  • Drop "in the poll" from next sentence.
  • The next part is missing mention of the 2017 election and the resulting minority government. Subsequent sections only make sense if material here is added.
  • I did consider that, but the lead's already pretty long as it is, and adding in another sentence about a general election that ultimately didn't really affect whether or not May's Brexit deal passed through the Commoms seems to me like it might just unnecessarily obfuscate things. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 14:08, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggested revision: "With the passage of legal formalities for Brexit deadlocked, Parliament voted for a 12 December general election following the passing of an act which prohibited the possibility of a no-deal Brexit." Mention of no deal Brexit is important here as this was the only way Parliamentrary consensus could be reached for the early election.

Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 04:41, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

  • @A Thousand Doors: apologies for not replying earlier but here's the few comments I have:
  • On 24 October 2011, Cameron suffered the largest rebellion over Europe since World War II when 81 Conservative MPs voted in favour - reword this (the words "suffer" and "rebellion" just sound off here in comparison to the rest of the section)
  • A bit better but maybe replace "Europe" with "European integration"? It might just be me but the wording "largest rebellion over Europe since World War II" still makes it sound like an armed rebellion yk. If a year's given, maybe replace "World War II" with the specific year that this last rebellion happened. Dan the Animator 05:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Faced with this growing Euroscepticism, on 23 January 2013 Cameron delivered a "long-awaited" speech at Bloomberg London, in which he promised an in–out referendum on EU membership if the Conservatives won a majority at the 2015 general election. This became known as the "Bloomberg speech". - reword and condense this into one sentence. The "long-awaited" quote is unnecessary imo (the rest of the section makes it clear that people were expecting/wanting action) and fragments (e.g. very short sentences missing the subject) should generally be avoided. Here's a potential rewording if it helps: "In response to the growing Euroscepticism, on 23 January 2013, Cameron delivered his Bloomberg speech in London in which he promised an in–out referendum on EU membership if the Conservatives won a majority at the 2015 general election."
  • Brexit subsection - is this content necessary here? I think the content is generally helpful but isn't this article by its nature just a fork of the main article Brexit? If a reader wants to learn more about Brexit itself, they can simply just click on the link to the parent article that's included in the lede. Also, the background section should only provide what's absolutely necessary for understanding the topic of this article (e.g. the progression/timeline of Brexit, not simply Brexit itself, which is what the parent article is about). Imo, I think it would make a lot of sense, and also be p beneficial, just to merge the entirety of this subsection into Brexit#Terminology_and_etymology, which also happens to be in quiet poor shape.
  • Sounds good to me. Personally don't feel too strongly about it but I'd still recommend opening a merge discussion or (and I think this is a much more efficient imo) just ping the past reviewers to this FLN and see what they think. Again, its not a major issue though so up to you how you want to go about it. Dan the Animator 05:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lasting impacts of Brexit on both the EU and the UK will be felt for many years. - reword this a bit (maybe replace with: Brexit has had lasting impacts on both the EU and UK.)
  • with changing patterns largely explained by older Brexit-supporting voters dying and younger Remain supporters reaching voting age - reword this (possible rewording: with analysts attributing the changing patterns to the declining population of elderly Brexit-supporting voters and an increasing number of younger Remain supporters reaching voting age.)
  • From 2022 onwards, opinion changed. - remove this (adds nothing imo) or integrate it into the next sentence
  • most British voters regretted leaving the EU with many Leave voters having changed their mind - quantify "most" and "many" if possible. Doesn't have to be exact numbers (though numbers are better) but try to use more precise words (like "simple majority," "supermajority," etc.).
  • Hmm, I guess as a workaround maybe consider adding in an additional sentence from one of the more noteworthy polls and include the numbers for that. It's alright if you keep it as-is too though. Dan the Animator 05:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • feeling that things had got worse since the referendum - replace "got" with "gotten"
I only looked over the lede, background, and aftermath sections but I'll take a look at the main timeline part part a bit later if you want. Feel free to ping back when you've gone over my suggestions. Thanks! Dan the Animator 19:35, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much, Dantheanimator! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 16:22, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to get back to review the rest of the article as soon as I get the chance (I've been caught up with some off-wiki stuff recently) but hope the two follow-ups above help. Cheers, Dan the Animator 05:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • critcises their lack of strategy for achieving European renegotiation fix spelling of criticises and reword the "achieving European renegotiation" part (maybe say "renegotiating the UK's EU membership" instead?) Dan the Animator 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • threshold of support required, and are set to be placed remove comma
  • to discuss and agree a collective approach for the future negotiations on Brexit add "on" after "agree" (e.g. "agree on a") and would recommend taking out "the" (so it would read as "agree on a collective approach for future negotiations on Brexit") Dan the Animator 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Graham Brady, chairman of the 1922 Committee, announces that he has received letters of no confidence in May from at least 48 Conservatives MPs, exceeding the threshold of 15% of the total. maybe clarify/elaborate here a bit? (is the "15% of the total" referring to 15% of all Conservative MPs or 15% of all MPs in Parliament (or something else)?) Dan the Animator 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • From each of eight MPs, Bercow selects a Brexit plan that might win the support of the majority of the House of Commons. maybe clarify (is this referring to "each of the eight MPs' plans"?) Dan the Animator 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bercow announces his intention of resign as speaker of the house replace "of" with "to" Dan the Animator 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Parliament prorogues (under 9 September) - expand this (mention that the Queen under Johnson's advice prorogued Parliament and that is was controversial); potential new sentence: In a controversial decision, the Queen prorogues Parliament on the advice of Johnson, intended to be in effect from some point between 9 and 12 September 2019 and last until the State Opening of Parliament on 14 October 2019. Dan the Animator 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Irish Taoiseach Leo Varadkar release a joint statement agreeing "a pathway to a possible deal" add "on" after "agreeing" (agreeing on "a pathway) Dan the Animator 21:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment by Queen of Hearts

edit

In the aftermath section, "Brexit has had lasting impacts on both the EU and UK, and will do for many years" is grammatically incorrect. QueenofHearts 00:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, thanks User:Queen of Hearts. Changed to "and will continue to for many years". A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 13:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; promoting. --PresN 03:12, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Timeline_of_Brexit/archive1&oldid=1195579672"