Talk:Mayor of Leicester

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

Politics of the United Kingdom

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

RfC: Should the article have a "History" section?

Consensus is not to have a history section. St Anselm (talk) 20:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should the article have a "History" section mentioning Mayors of Leicester duing the last 700 years? In ictu oculi (talk) 06:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There has been discussion between myself and Sportandpolitics on our respective User Talk pages, but no 3rd editor, and evidently differing perspectives, so best to start with a totally clean and neutral plate here. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 07:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC) [reply]

No -- The consensus is that local councillors are generally NN. In recent times the mayor has had a merely ceremonial role, occupied in turn by senior councillors. Appointment as mayor merely reflects having served a long time. The nearest equivalent preceding role to an elected mayor is probably "leader of the council", the leader of the majority party, but they are usually also regarded as NN. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:36, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No -- As per Peterkingiron. You can add only in cases where mayor has done some extra ordinary thing such as became Prime Minster or won a Victoria Cross(just an example) or something which is notable.--Vyom25 (talk) 05:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No - for the reasons outlined. At most, you might note whether notable folks of Leicester were also Lords Mayor at some point, either in the main Leicester article or in History of Leicestershire. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Vyom25. Apart from the composer-mayor of Leicester Hugh Aston in the 16thC, a look in Google Books suggests the most notable action of a Mayor of Leicester was briefly imprisoning the Lollard Margery Kempe in the 14th Century. Some overlap with MP bios such as John Dove Harris, but it wasn't a city dominated by one of those super-notable personalities like first non-Lord Mayor of Middlesbrough, Henry Bolckow. Should Bolckow be mentioned in that article?

@Orangemike. FWIW "Lord mayor" is very a recent title given to some cities in 1880s, there were 600 years of "mayor of Leicester" before that. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:55, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The three disinterested users are unanimous in their decision that there is no "history" section. if certain individuals are notable then do as Orangemike suggested add them to the main Leicester article or history of Leicestershire article. Otherwise do not add a "History" section (or similar) or the individuals to this article as its not the right place. Sport and politics (talk) 13:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@sports and politics. No disrespect but RFCs are for third party opinions please keep this in mind. I don't talk for others but if I was disinterested I would have ignored RFCbot's message on my talkpage. From your comment it seems that you are of almost same opinion.

@ictu oculi. I would say that you can add these info to history of Leicester but not here. But then again these are my views.--Vyom25 (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Vyom25 from reading your comments it comes across as if you are confusing disinterested with uninterested. Sport and politics (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

okay arms pocketed....I confused them as same thing...sorry.--Vyom25 (talk) 10:51, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No -- per Peterkingiron. United States Man (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mayor of Leicester. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121005225903/http://www.leicester.gov.uk/elections2011/electedMayorResults.aspx to http://www.leicester.gov.uk/elections2011/electedMayorResults.aspx

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 06:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]