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
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
In the third paragraph, "Labour" in this context is almost certainly wrong. One of the motivations of the Act, as the article makes clear, was to avoid candidates using deceptive party names (such as "Conversative") which could cause confusion in the minds of voters. As such, there were several candidates before the Act who used such tricks, typically spelling alterations. So, "Labur" is a distinct possibility which somewhere in the back of my memory rings a bell, though it may have been "Labor". I've tried to get some reference for this but, unfortunately, search engines don't like you searching with what it considers misspelt terms, so I have been unable to pin this down yet. What is certain, though, is that it could not be "Labour". In the meantime, I have reverted to "Labor". Emeraude (talk) 16:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}