Talk:Scottish Parliament

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured articleScottish Parliament is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 9, 2007.
On this day... Article milestones
October 26, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
November 14, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
February 13, 2021Featured article reviewDemoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 1, 2011, July 1, 2015, July 1, 2018, and July 1, 2019.
Current status: Former featured article

Greens - are they part of government or not?[edit]

Now that the Co-operation agreement has been agreed between the SNP and Scottish Greens, how should this be mentioned in the infobox? The similar agreement in the New Zealand Parliament between Labour and the Green Party is listed on its wiki page as Labour being the government then the Green Party as in a co-operation agreement with. Given this precedent I believe this is how it should be listed on this page as well, especially since it most arguably accurately describes the situation and the Scottish Greens are not fully part of government nor fully in opposition. VUOP (talk) 23:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Giving this more thought, the two Green MSPs who are about to become ministers means that the party is part of government. Maybe the Greens should be included under the government heading with a note explaining the agreement. If this was to be agreed then all Green MSPs should be included as all SNP MSPs are even though not all are ministers or secretaries. VUOP (talk) 01:20, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this up here, it's a bit of a confusing one and I'm not sure what the answer is. While the Greens will enter government with their two ministers, apparently the remaining five will sit with the opposition; even electing new leaders for this opposition group. On New Zealand, it might be better to compare the situation to that before their 2020 election, where the Labour Party did not have a majority and the Greens were providing confidence and supply (as the Scottish Greens are here). Although to be honest, that precedent confuses me even more as the Greens were listed under "Confidence and supply" while NZ First were listed under the government alongside Labour, despite all three parties having ministers in government. I suppose there's a lot of detail I'm missing out on there. It might be that we just need to wait a couple of weeks until we've got all the information to settle on a format. Liam McM 09:04, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The remaining 5 greens are treated as the same 2 green MSPs who are becoming ministers, the green group as a whole has signed up to the agreement with the Scottish Government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:8F37:A00:313F:82CB:4C99:672E (talkcontribs)
Given today's decision by the PO on the status of the Green group, I agree and think that the current state of the infobox is correct. Liam McM 13:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sessions of Parliament[edit]

Please can the article describe the sessions of parliament. John a s (talk) 21:32, 2 October 2021 (UTC) OK, I added template Scottish Governments to the article which covers this. John a s (talk) 12:34, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking of OABot[edit]

Hey! Is there any reason OABot is specifically denied from editing this page? The denial seems to have been added in Special:Diff/1028479251 as the bot was supposedly being "malfunctional". Is this still the case, or can the bot denial be removed? Pinging Cambial Yellowing as they initiated the denial. Aidan9382 (talk) 19:49, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it was adding open access parameters where article was not open access, which then had to be undone manually. Cambial foliar❧ 20:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think it would be worth seeing if the bot has gotten any better a year later? I'm trying to reduce the overall amount of bot blocks in mainspace, as its generally not the best practice. Aidan9382 (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. No additional journal sources have been added to the page AFAIK, so there would be no meaningful test to ascertain whether this was the case. Have there been any significant changes to the code? Can’t see a changelog. Cambial foliar❧ 20:24, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just here to clear, I haven't exactly kept up with the bot. I'll consider doing some testing on a user subpage of my own, but for now, I'll leave the block here, just in case. Thanks for the comments! Aidan9382 (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]