Talk:Results of the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Layout[edit]

I have slightly changed the layout again as we must have a single bar to show how England voted as a whole and not just within its nine regions. (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 21:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC))[reply]

England's vote may be an interesting statistic noted in the lead. As far as breakdowns go, all the regions are treated equally. I've already explained this to you before on the main talk age. Jolly Ω Janner 04:58, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Results maps[edit]

As requested by an IP user, I have created the (currently blank) results maps for each region. These maps are ready to be colour coded according to the result of the referendum in each voting area once the results are declared. I realise it's rather soon, but I had some spare time and it's better to be prepared! Mirrorme22 (talk) 16:36, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Colour coding results from voting areas[edit]

As this is a plebiscite I don't believe it is useful to show the outcome of a particular voting area as simple binary, and as such feel that colour coding each reporting area as such is misleading. If it were possible to do so as some sort of gradient, I would be happy with that.

Also, for any colour coding, please always provide a legend. 87.254.76.130 (talk) 00:30, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Such a gradient is too complex and having binary coloring for such kinds of voting results is international standard. For details someone can check the numbers. --176.92.200.215 (talk) 01:16, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, as the vote result depends on the total number of votes, as opposed to the total number of voting areas 'won' by each option, it's not particularly meaningful to colour the rows by the most popular choice. However if colours are used, I would prefer
  1. 65B1FF for leave for Leave and
  2. FFC010 for Remain as these are close to the colours being used by the BBC to report results (I have chosen a lighter colour for "Leave" than the BBC, because otherwise there isn't enough contrast with the hyperlink colour). --Tim Bennett (talk) 02:06, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
red/green is wikipedia standard for yes/no. BBC choices are of no relevance for us at wikipedia. --176.92.200.215 (talk) 02:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Electronsoup: I've moved your comment because you posted your comment in the middle of the OP's comment. --st170etalk 02:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Decision on the main referendum page was for yellow/blue. While Red/green is OK in a table, its not acceptable for graphics (due to colour blindness). However, the colours should be consistent throughout.--Nilfanion (talk) 07:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is it me, or are the colours in the tables the wrong way around? Like, why are states that voted "Leave" coloured in yellow and states that voted "Remain" in blue? ~ KN2731 {talk} 07:54, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to @Aréat: for fixing. ~ KN2731 {talk} 08:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thanks, but someone else did the whole change while I was roughly halfway - kudo to the fast editor (. I was using the color in the maps. I've got nothing against the different color, but shouldn't we long for same color in maps and tables?--Aréat (talk) 08:31, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additional column[edit]

As the percentages are largely irrelevant to the actual result, could someone please add a difference between leave and remain column? As that's the useful number. Also, would a size of district column not be useful? 2A02:C7D:8E73:CF00:60A0:A220:9C8F:172D (talk) 02:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yorkshire??[edit]

Isn't Yorkshire in inverted colours? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.200.119.122 (talk) 08:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Just been fixed. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 08:50, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coloring maps[edit]

I thought the other maps after the one at the top would be colored once the official results are in? With some of them, people have already started when region results weren't fully in. The colors they used then (red and green) and which are still there are even wrong now, so that calls even more for correct, full coloring of all the maps. --79.242.222.168 (talk) 20:34, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for swiftly caring about the request! :) --79.242.222.168 (talk) 21:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:31, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regional results maps[edit]

Note that I've reverted a change of the regional maps from the current leave/remain to a detailed strength-of-vote map. This is simply because the background colours (of the sea and land outside the area of interest) are unsuitable and make the subject areas much harder to see. Once the background colours are suitably adjusted, I see no problem with these changes.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Results and estimates for all constituencies[edit]

I apologise for the provisional quality of my edit. The government computer said that I could download vector descriptions of the boundaries, which would enable me to programme my computer to determine the relationship between results and constituencies more accurately and without error. When I asked for all of the boundaries, I received nothing. Then I was rushed by the tight timetable of the Article 50 bill.

You may want to list your corrections to the table here (in a uniform format please), if they affect the rankings. Then I can feed them to my programme to remake the rankings.

Eventually I hope to obtain the boundary vectors, make a list of the relationships between the boundaries and put the programme that constructs the list on the talk page so anybody can update it. AuditorGeneral (talk) 14:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the place for original research. We should be reporting what has been said about the referendum results in reliable sources, not conducting our own analysis. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 00:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I realised that this might be a problem, so I tried to confine myself to presenting the data in a way that is convenient for readers to do their own analysis. I am struggling to see where the border is. I think what I have done is just to collate data that was presented elsewhere (much of it on this page) so that it is routine calculation. It seems to me that any originality is just in the arrangement, and I think that such originality is inevitable in something that is not just a copy. Please give me more detailed guidance.AuditorGeneral (talk) 17:12, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The table is a swingometer, which, I think, is routinely in use to display election resultsAuditorGeneral (talk) 19:44, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

South Hams[edit]

So, considering South Hams voted 53% remain, how can it be that the two constituencies that make up South Hams (Totnes and South West Devon) both voted to leave (54% and 55% respectively)? Surely there's no way both of those things can be true at once. 2A02:C7D:1272:8000:3CB7:F932:329:54AC (talk) 01:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Constituencies and information[edit]

Looking at the constituencies I notice that many of them have been set up so its the current state of the constituency rather than what it was like on the day of the referendum, for example on here is has Sarah Olney listed as an MP when she wasn't an MP at the time of the referendum and it shows Douglas Carswell being listed as independent when on June 24th 2016 he was a UKIP MP. I therefore quite strongly suggest that we should use the information that was correct on June 24th and not current information. C. 22468 Talk to me 16:27, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the table "List of constituency Results" There is a column sandwiched between the columns "MP Position and "Region" which has a colour-bar and a percentage as the entries. There is no column heading indicating what this information might mean. Can this be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1205:5018:40B0:B0AA:A753:341E:C60F (talk) 12:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

South Derbyshire[edit]

The South Derbyshire constituency has two different results linked to it. One had 60.3% Leave, the other 60.4% Leave. Who can opine on which of these is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:39C:1B00:F941:9D8E:4EED:4F6C (talk) 22:00, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gower Constituency Correction[edit]

Small issue: Colours are the wrong way around on the Gower row in the list of constituency results. I don't really know how to use tables, so I'll leave it to someone else! CWM 93 (talk) 17:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)CWM_93[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Results of the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 10:02, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

National England results maps?[edit]

At the moment for England we only have the regional results map, would it be possible and practical for two maps to be created which showed the national results for the whole of England only in the following designs which I am taken from the East Midlands results maps as a example.

This is the kind of idea I had in mind from the 2015 general election, maybe excluding the city pullouts.

If Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own national results maps why doesn’t England? (2A02:C7F:5621:2A00:D85:60AA:3B1A:493E (talk) 18:05, 27 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I support this idea as there should be National England results maps. (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 10:44, 28 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]
I also like this idea, why has no action been taken as of yet? (2A02:C7F:5621:2A00:5CB7:DD28:581A:44EE (talk) 15:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

National result template edit war[edit]

What the hell is going on? From what I can tell the difference is semantics and if anything the UKEU2016Results template seems be more consistent with the other regional results templates. Paianni (talk) 09:34, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not – the standard is {{Referendum}}. Unfortunately MOTORAL1987 and his IP accounts refuse to accept this and have repeatedly reverted the version he created back into several articles to make it appear to be in widespread use. As an example of his modus operandi, the discussion directly above this one is actually him talking to himself. Number 57 11:26, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Data Error for West Midlands[edit]

{{helpme}}

The figure for the total number of Leave votes in the West Midlands has been mis-typed as 1,775,687 at one point. Elsewhere it is given as 1,755,687, which is compatible with the total for the whole of England. I have not made any correction, because I am not experienced enough in Wikipedia editing. Consequential changes must include the West Midlands Remain/Leave percentages. 

PeterPedant (talk) 15:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Doing... --DannyS712 (talk) 01:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PeterPedant:  Done I think I did what you asked for. Did I? --DannyS712 (talk) 01:30, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Constituency results table colours[edit]

Sorry but can someone please explain to me why there are two colours for each constituency in the constituency results table rather than one? For example, the first constituency in the table is Streatham. It has the colours red for Labour (because the MP for Streatham is from the Labour Party) but the MP majority colour is blue, corresponding to the Conservative Party. The second constituency, Bristol West, has red for Labour and light green for the Green Party, and so on. This makes no sense. PlanetDeadwing (talk) 18:44, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a hat note to explain. Feel free to amend if you think it needs improving. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bristol West makes sense because, at the 2015 election, the Green Party came second. At the 2017 election, the anti-Brexit voters went to Labour and the pro-Brexit voters to the Tories, which is why in 2017 the order changed to 1 Labour, 2 Conservative. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vale of Glamorgan[edit]

The local authority voted to remain; While, the UK constituency voted to leave, I don't see too, when looking at the map a big difference in boundary changes. Japhes5005 (talk) 22:01, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bridgend Constituency[edit]

On the constituency map, Bridgend is colour yellow for remain yet in the leave column, it has 50% Japhes23 (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Results_of_the_2016_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum&oldid=1204638996"