Dubious

edit

"The Speaker and his deputies are considered independent, do not normally vote, and are not included in the figures of party strengths within the House of Commons.[dubious – discuss] "

I agree with the original wording. What is dubious, or what needs discussion? Jezza (talk) 21:09, 22 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

I deleted the "dubious" tag, because I found a reference on the official House of Commons web site that confirms this statement. Nick Beeson (talk) 15:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ways and means committee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Archive link looks good. I'll fill in the rest of the template to eliminate the "missing title" error. —LinkTiger (talk) 14:28, 10 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

"Ways and Means Committee" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ways and Means Committee. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 18#Ways and Means Committee until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. MB 18:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply