Skeptical Voter: Help Wanted

From SkepticalVoter
Jump to: navigation, search

If you're interested in helping out on the Skeptical Voter wiki, below is a list of ongoing editing tasks. Please edit this page to keep to-do lists up-to-date to help other editors.

If you are doing a large editing task, and you'd like some help, add it to the list below. Please sign it with your user name so people can contact you if they have any questions.

Not everyone will agree on what counts as a "skeptical issue". Please contribute to areas that you think are important. If you want to debate an issue, please don't debate it here. Instead take it to a relevant Talk page, such as that of the proposing editor. You may link to the discussion from this page.

RSC Science Debate

A debate between Science and Technology spokesmen for each party:

It might be useful to go through this and add information about the science policies of: Conservative Party, Labour Party, and Liberal Democrat Party. There may also be things worth noting for the spokesmen: Adam Afriyie, Lord Drayson, Evan Harris.

Added by: Skep 16:43, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Royal Society Pairing Scheme

Note MPs who have participated, and any reports of what they did.

Added by: Skep 00:06, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


An issue which often provokes strong feelings, but also one where scientific evidence is raised in the debate. We're interested in the latter.

Conclusions of Science and Technology Committee report

There are a large number of MPs' pages where it notes how they voted in the May 2008 debate on abortion amendments. The text used in most cases describes the 24 week limit as the "scientific and medical consensus" and references the Science and Technology Committee report of 2007 for this. However, I do not think this correctly represents what the report's conclusions were.

I've changed a few pages (e.g. Andrew George, John Hemming, Iris Robinson) by removing references to the consensus being 24 weeks and the reference, and adding the following paragraph (which includes the same reference but for a different claim):

The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report of October 2007<ref></ref>
had found no good evidence of change since the limit was set in 1990, and hence no new reason for a reduction. However, it acknowledged that
this was only one of many factors to be taken into account when legislating, and did not make any recommendations as to how MPs should vote.

Improvements welcome!

It would be nice to do the rest of the MPs. A search for "scientific and medical consensus" seems to get the majority of them.

Since a set of standard texts has been used and there are a large number of pages involved, this task is a possible candidate for automation.

Added by: Skep 16:13, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Commons debate 2008

There is lots of discussion of medical/scientific evidence in the May 2008 Commons debate on abortion limits. It would be useful to add some of this to the wiki. I've done some that show the sort of thing I'm thinking about: Richard Ottaway, Mark Pritchard.

A transcript of the debate can be found in Hansard or on The Hansard source is the primary source, but the TheyWorkForYou transcription is easier to read and has extra info. I've added both as references.

To-do MPs listed below. I've added a "+" to those who spoke several times, as these might be worth checking first. Please update the list if you do any MPs. For some, you may find they said nothing relevant to this wiki; they can simply be removed from the list.

Remember at Skeptical Voter we're primarily interested in how MPs work with science and evidence.

Added by: Skep 16:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Debate 2012

  • Link???

UK Statistics Authority

Need to follow their correspondence for MPs potentially misusing statistics - an ongoing project.

Added by: Skep 09:45, 15 December 2012 (UTC)