Revising the Commission's proposals, vol. I - East Midlands
Lincolnshire
This is broadly uncontroversial (there'll be pitchforks raised against North Hykeham's inclusion in Lincoln BC, but it's unavoidable and anyways entirely reasonable). However, the transfer of Kirkby la Thorpe & South Kyme and Heckington Rural (1 and 2) to Boston & Skegness would mean that this includes portions of Holland, Lindsey
and Kesteven, and cuts very near Sleaford. They should be retained in Sleaford. OTOH Chapel Saint Leonards (3) is part of the urbanized area around Skegness and should be transferred there. Its population is not sufficient to bring Boston & Skegness within tolerance, therefore I also added Willoughby with Sloothby (4) - this could be exchanged for another ward. Wragby (5), though part of the within-tolerance Gainsborough constituency at current, is an orphan ward there being part of East Lindsey district. Its transfer to Louth & Horncastle is thus not solely motivated by bringing that back up to size. At the other end, Waddington East & Bracebridge Heath (6) can be retained within Lincoln if Skellingthorpe (7) is not (or if North Hykeham is split), and with the retention of 1 and 2 in Sleaford this switch is necessary. (Alternately Skellingthorpe could also be included in Gainsborough).
The unchanged South Holland & the Deepings and barely changed Grantham & Stamford constituency (not shown in image) are left as in the Commission's proposal.
Gainsborough is now identical to West Lindsey district, and that's a much more descriptive name of the area (and Louth & Horncastle could also be called East Lindsey - Horncastle is quite obscure), but my personal preference is to keep old names in place when seats don't change much, even when they're not great.
Northamptonshire
Northamptonshire provides some difficult choices, and I've come to agree that the Commission's decision to create the cross-county constituency in the west, along with a reduced Corby and a Kettering that only gains Finedon, is the least bad option. I don't see why the Wellingborough wards of Wollaston and Bozeat (1 and 2) should be transferred to Northampton South, where they sit quite uneasily, though. They fit into Wellingborough quite easily, as does Stanwick (3) which is quite near Irthlingborough - a minor issue this. Grange Park (4) should be included in Northampton South anyways, but to keep South Northamptonshire large enough it then needs to retain Hackleton (5). The commission's Northampton North is of course fine. There are ... issues ... around the edges of their Daventry & Lutterworth, but these are not easily fixed, and in the end I came out with an exactly identical design.
Leicestershire
Leicestershire could in principle remain almost unchanged if Rutland is combined with Northamptonshire and Melton district with Nottinghamshire (this would also mean one fewer cross-county constituency, 2 instead of 3), but that's not ideal when seen from either Northamptonshire or Nottinghamshire so meh. Just fixing the additional unnecessary change introduced by the Commission.
Rutland & Melton, Harborough, the three Leicester constituencies, and South Leicestershire are as proposed by the Commission, except that given that "South Leicestershire" used to be called Blaby until the last review, always included more of Blaby than of South Leicestershire district, and is now losing much of the latter, I'm in favor of restoring the original name.
But there seems no good reason for transferring the Appleby and the Ibstock area wards (1-5) from North West Leicestershire, wich is not just in quota but also coterminous with a district of the same name, to Bosworth or to transfer Ratby, Bagworth & Thornton (6) from Bosworth to Charnwood. Indeed, Bosworth could remain unchanged by also retaining Markfield, Stanton & Fieldhead (7), but this would mess with my ideas elsewhere and also make Groby (to its southeast, and also in Hinckley & Bosworth district) into an orphan ward. These ideas involve the transfer of the Quorn area wards (8 and 9) instead of The Wolds (10) from Loughborough to Charnwood, resulting in more compact shapes for both seats. The transfer of the two Shepshed wards (11 and 12) from Loughborough to NW Leicestershire is also removed as unnecessary.
Loughborough is in principle sufficiently centered on the town to retain the name, but cross-county constituencies should be clearly marked as such in the name, I think. Both Bosworth and Harborough are fairly funny misnomers, but are grandfathered by time & tradition.
Nottinghamshire
Much of this is very good, or as good as can be, but the inclusion of Bilborough (1) as an orphan ward in Broxtowe & Hucknall (and thus the division of Nottingham among
five constituencies) is wholly unnecessary - if the commission's intention was to leave Beeston (the unparished area) intact it has failed to do so as that also includes Bramcote. Bilborough can be easily exchanged for Toton & Chilwell Meadows and Chilwell West (2 and 3). This cuts through the Chilwell area but along an easily recognizable boundary. The seat also should be renamed Nottingham West & Beeston as it's absurd to have a "Nottingham South" that doesn't include Clifton. Indeed Clifton's 20,000 electors deserve to be recognized in the constituency name - "West Bridgford & Clifton" being almost as acceptable as "Rushcliffe & Clifton" though.
I would also propose the retention of Gotham (4) in the seat, and the transfer of East Bridgford (5) to Newark, but these are minor quibbles. They can stand independently of each other - it's possible to do either without knock-on effects. And I think the Sherwood seat's major redrawing should be recognized in the name, proposing Arnold & Sherwood.
Derbyshire
I agree with the abolution of Mid Derbyshire, the proposals for Chesterfield and Erewash, that High Peak should be left unchanged, and also with the general idea behind the redrawing of the two northeastern seats. But there is no earthly reason to split Derby up among four constituencies creating three orphan wards, and also no need to cross the Derbyshire Dales - North East Derbyshire line at all (and certainly no reason to split the town of Dronfield!)
So... I am proposing that Dronfield Woodhouse (1) and Barlow & Holmesfield (2) be added to Bolsover & Dronfield instead of Derbyshire Dales, that Wingerworth (3), Brampton & Walton (4) and Ashover (5) be retained in NE Derbyshire's successor seat of Alfreton & Clay Cross, and that for both compactness and population balance reasons Tibshelf (6) be transferred to Alfreton & Clay Cross, while Wingfield (7) and the two Ripley wards (8 and 9) are retained in Amber Valley which loses its Derby ward of Allestree (18). Derbyshire Dales is brought to quota by gaining the four northeasternmost wards of South Derbyshire (10 to 13) instead. (It was never contiguous with the district of the same name, and should never have lost its historical and more descriptive name of West Derbyshire, though this is a minor issue.) South Derbyshire retains Aston (14).
In Derby, the commission seems to have been looking for two wards that could be removed, rather than for a coherent two-ward area. Chellaston (15) and Boulton (16) form such an area and - unlike Mickleover (17) - they were already included in South Derbyshire before 2010. I propose to restore that link.
Within the remainder of Derby there are at least three different possible maps, shown here in lieu of a description. I have no strong preference.
The largest Clifton in the UK* is in Nottingham, anyways. 
