![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Image:ECI logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 06:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
>> Election Commission sets ball rolling for Lok Sabha polls in 2014 >> Full transcript: Stand by my report on no evidence against Modi, says SIT chief RK Raghavan to NDTV >> Infographic: How India forms a government*( Lihaas ( talk) 15:30, 8 December 2013 (UTC)).
AAP are a minor party unrepresented in parliament, that is not a reason to post them here as then every other represented party will have to be put in the infobox. Lihaas ( talk) 04:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
ɳ
I have reverted the edits which was edited by User:Sanatan2014, because,
Shriram Talk 12:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sriram,
If that is the case, it has to be mentioned that Wikipidea is giving publicity for only two parties and influencing people's decision by highlighting NDA and UPA. The format of the page has to be changed in such a way that all parties are recognized equally. It should not be not used for highlighting a few and mentioning others as 'other party', thus giving less importance to new parties. A few things required: 1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties 2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA 3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same 4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 16:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
The structure of the election 2014 would be such that it give equal importance to all parties. I would like to disuss the earlier mentioned points individually rather than a vague answer. Highlighting them again below
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Soorejmg ( talk) 16:38, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sriram, To simplify the question- The objective of the page should be to tell people the details of general election in a such a manner that every party contesting election gets equal importance. It should not create wrong impression on people mind from the previous election results or such historic ideas. In the page , Modi and Rajiv Gandhi alone are being pictured as main people. Until the election is complete for 2014, no one is important than other. So the format of the page should be such that all parties gets equal importance. For this purpose, 4 points which I suggested above is important. Contesting 350 seats is showing the importance that the party has the ability to keep that many candidates across country which makes it important ( that part is any way not important for the page format). I am also not asking to highlight modi based on modi trend. They are just assuming that one is going win before the actual result comes out. What we require is just a format which gives equal importance as mentioned above. Highlighting the 4 points that will guarentee equal importance to all people-
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections Soorejmg ( talk) 08:10, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I would say Wikipedia is being used now for canvasing of Rahul Gandhi and Narendra Modi, UPA and NDA. My suggestion is pretty straight forward and simple. Remove this canvasing of Modi and Rahul. Other wise gives add PM candidates /Leader of all parties. That is the least than can be done.
Could you give an inline reason for each point why it cannot be done?-
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 14:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Surpising that you are not willing to give inline answers!!!
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 12:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Seriously friend, give an inline comment on each point. It will clarify the points instead of deviating away.
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY firs if you say there no importance in the order in which parties are listed
Thanks Soorej 116.15.45.112 ( talk) 15:35, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Shriram, Waiting for your reply.
Hi EvergreenFir, Inviting you here . EvergreenFir. Help to solve this if you can.
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 09:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please correct the spelling of "Satewise" to "Statewise"
Dayalrajendran (
talk) 16:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Done(
Lihaas (
talk)
17:35, 5 March 2014 (UTC)).
Please update the mentioned section. Headlines Today withdraw its opinion poll result given by c-voter after controversy(sting operation done on c-voter). Thanks -- 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 18:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
The infobox information has been persistent reverted back to earlier revisions. i added a comment " not being mp doesn't specify anything. to be a leader you need to be a mp and for that seat is to be decided" to specify that seat is yet to be decided and should not be changed. And more too both of them in the infobox are leaders. the mere fact that one is a declared PM candidate and another is just not declared but he is leading the elections as Head of election campaign. that just make no difference at all to be added to infobox rather this should be added and expanded by adding it to the content of election campaign. therefore there is no need to add this "not mp" and "PM candidate" or "Head of election campaign" in the infobox
So, to counter there are no PM candidature allowed in Parlimentry Democracy - Khushank94 ( talk) 06:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Just Some Days or Moments ,i can say... Khushank94 ( talk) 07:25, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
need consensus...explained fully in my first comment..... Khushank94 ( talk) 15:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
NOT intersted at all Khushank94 ( talk) 08:05, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
In my view Votes Are not needed and are simply not necessary. Khushank94 ( talk) 02:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC) please provide me with a source on ECI website explaining all six together. I have just no problem with all these being here but why not decrease them to four removing the last two because they are not national parties. Khushank94 ( talk) 03:00, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
In my veiw it should be a simple thumb rule, choose one that(who) is in command. Khushank94 ( talk) 13:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Leader | Rahul Gandhi | Narendra Modi |
Leader's seat | ||
– current | Amethi | — |
– contested | — | Varanasi |
that will be a little ambiguous but you can still Go ahead you can try it out, as long as others don't revert it.
this all is needed before election afterwards it doesn't matter that they were incumbent or not. -
Khushank94 (
talk)
06:49, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
I think it's better now...Whats say? - Khushank94 ( talk) 14:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC) I was not able to swap it like that the word 'seat' came down to new row. - Khushank94 ( talk) 14:20, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
We already have SVG file for election constituency of india which was used for 2009 election results. Here Map. And map of constituency with dates of election on Election Commission website here. Can someone with vector graphics editor like Inkscape or Photoshop use both maps and create on for this article. Its easy. I do not have computer else i have done so. Regards Nizil ( talk) 13:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello. The parties section of article seems to be a victim of edit wars.
Anyway, I think here on Wikipedia things added keeping previous records in mind until new output come. On this particular note, I feel the UPA won previous general elections, they need to be mentioned first(one can make changes on Indian general election, 2019 page, if NDA wins
Indian general election, 2014). I hope wikipedians are getting what I am trying to depict. I might be wrong on this, please help.--
25 CENTS VICTORIOUS
☣
19:02, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The ruling party (majority) gets mention first. Look at
United States presidential election, 2000 and
United States presidential election, 2004 the ruling party gets the mention first. That's Democratic in 2000 and Republican in 2004.--
Kinderlander (
talk) 04:52, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
If it is Alphabetical then Aam Aadmi Party has to be mentioned first not NDA or BJP. So it is always the ruling party that gets the first mention. And it is not alphabetical. --
Kinderlander (
talk)
04:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC) Agree
If it is alphabetical AAP will be first. But I disagree that it is alphabetical, but has to be ruling party. -- Kinderlander ( talk) 05:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
NIBODH ( talk) 03:44, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) will put up 85 candidates in nine states in the upcoming Lok Sabha polls, party general secretary Dipankar Bhattacharyya said. The party will contest seats in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Punjab, Jharkhand and in Puducherry, Mr. Bhattacharyya said at a press conference. He was accompanied by lone party MLA, Vinod Singh. Mr. Bhattacharyya expressed regret that CPI (ML)’s endeavour to forge an alliance with Left parties had not materialised. But he cautioned the Left parties about joining hands with JD (U). The move by the Left parties, including CPI and CPI (M), to forge an alliance with JD (U) is “not good” as it would only weaken them, Mr. Bhattacharyya claimed while favouring the proposed Third Front. “I would favour a Third Front as an alternative force comprising non-Congress, non-BJP parties,” he said. Demanding a mechanism for fixing prices, the CPI (ML) leader said that the inflation and prevailing corruption was at the root of all the problems plaguing the country. Mr. Bhattacharyya, who had hailed the formation of the Aam Aadmi Party government in Delhi, has supported its leader Arvind Kejriwal’s approach on the gas price issue saying it was in the country’s interest. CPI (ML) strongly opposes privatisation of any natural resource as these belong to the people of the country, he asserted. The party is also opposed to the acquisition of agricultural land for industrial purposes and recruitment on contractual basis or against honorariums, he said. Referring to the recent killing of AJSU party leader Tileshwar Sahu in Barhi, Hazaribagh, Mr. Bhattacharyya said that the killing was a sequel to a political conspiracy and should be probed by CBI.
The bombings occurred at an election rally that is pertinent to this election page.( Lihaas ( talk) 14:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)).
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Fourteen-parties-close-ranks-against-communalism/articleshow/24950421.cms lists the People's Party of Punjab as attendee, but that contradicts the Indian Express reference in the article. Any clarity on this? -- Soman ( talk) 14:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I removed the passage "The eight largest metropolises in India are considered important because they constitute 31 seats, larger than some regions altogether. In the previous election, the INC-led UPA won 24 of these seats, but the UPA is trailing in these areas." Whilst the two authors of the article in question are entitled to their opinion, the analysis is extremely thin and I see no reason for Wikipedia to reproduce the argument in this article. There has to be tens of thousands of commentaries on the Indian elections, and we cannot reproduce all.
First of all, the authors make the argument "Clearly, there was support for UPA amongst the urban, big-city Indians at the time. While these cities are spread across the country, their cosmopolitan nature and economic profile puts them closer to each other than to their immediate hinterland, in our view." Looking at the outcome of the 2009 elections, that analysis is clearly flawed. What would be the linkage between an AIMIM voter in Hyderabad and a Trinamool voter in Kolkata? In reality, Indian elections represent a myriad different scenarios, and the Trinamool vote in Kolkata should be seen in backdrop of state politics (anti-incumbency vote against WB state government), the AIMIM vote is a communal vote (not a vote for UPA as such), the Chennai situation is yet another one, Mumbai and Maharashtra has its own processes, etc., etc..
Looking at demographics, the 8 metropolis counts for 5.3% of the Lok Sabha seats. In many other countries that number would be far higher, it's quite common that the capital city alone accounts for 10-20% of the seats in a national parliament. Contrary to the argument in the "India Spend" article, it is the rural vote that is the king-maker in India, to the frustration of political pundits, twitterati, AAP and neoliberals. Remember how the pundits failed to predict the 2004 outcome? The answer lies in their bias to see correlation in strength of urban and rural votes. -- Soman ( talk) 16:23, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I think that the article has to be reconstructed somehow. The Lok Sabha poll is not a straight, US-style contest between two major national parties. Alliances such as UPA and NDA are extremely fluid and their compositions will certainly change once the results are out and ministries are being allocated. The reality is that alliances are set on state levels, and that each state has its own dynamics. For example, the UDF in Kerala is not the same as the UPA, the Kerala, the fact that the RSP is contesting as part of the UDF does not make RSP a UPA constituent. Notably in West Bengal RSP is contesting as part of the Left Front, against NDA and UPA partners. Likewise the All India Forward Bloc is a partner of the Left Front in West Bengal, but is contesting against the Left Democratic Front in Kerala. The Samajwadi Party is aligned with a third front in Jammu and Kashmir, but that alliance is limited to that state alone. Whilst seat-sharing between Janata Dal (Secular) and left parties has failed to bear fruit in Karnataka, JD(S) is allotted a seat as LDF candidate in Kerala. Etc, etc.
I propose that we: 1) Include parties, not alliances, in infobox. Prior to the election the resonable inclusion criteria is the six national parties recognised by the Election Commission. 2) Having a section on alliances, with subsections for each of the two main alliances (UPA and NDA). But no subsections on the constituent parties. 3) Having section on parties, with short subsections on the parties contesting: one each for national parties, one each for recognised state parties and others currently represented in Lok Sabha and one common subsection for 'Others' not covered in the other categories. -- Soman ( talk) 17:26, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
As per the "Pre-Poll alliance" passage, I see the following issues in quick reading:
-- Soman ( talk) 03:26, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Soman, as per the Eelection Commission of India, There are only Two Collations (Alliances) are Registered Officially which are NDA (The First Alliance Registered in 1998) and UPA registered in 2004. So General Elections are contested mainly on the basis of Alliance & Pre-poll understandings. So I request you to not add inbox with those small Parties which are not yet formed any alliance officially. Let them Join together and form alliance then, lets consider 75 million of votes... You can add their Details in Parties Menu - Other Sub Menu.. Warm Regards.. Sanatan2014 ( talk) 07:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
( Logical1004) & Soman Samajwadi Party & Trinamool Congress are not National Parties. Please Remove the same.. Warm Regards Sanatan2014 ( talk) 09:42, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
The undersigned user condemn the use of words "advani drama" by an editor and would like the user to Assume good faith.
The undersigned user would like to ask the editor to refrain from using such words.- Khushank94 ( talk) 09:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
According to < /info/en/?search=Indian_general_election,_2009>: Seats won by INC, BJP and CPI(M) are 262 159 79 respectively. However, this page erroneously describes: Last election 119,110,776 votes (28.55%), 206 seats 78,435,538 (18.80%), 116 seats 25,728,889 votes (6.17%), 21 seats
Could someone please fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BharathSampath93 ( talk • contribs) 19:27, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
this article is about INDIA and here we don't use any such word such as provinces. so, why not change it with states or others where ever needed see this , [2]. - Khushank94 ( talk) 14:19, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
A few more photos of public meetings and banners extra should be added to the article. Thanks Shyamsunder ( talk) 12:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
This was done int he previous multi-phase UP election during the process to indicate where ti is. When it is done then it is removed altogether. Its sort of an idnciator of an iongoing event as the page is read during the phases. [3]( Lihaas ( talk) 16:29, 23 March 2014 (UTC)).
it's alright to add process but those big crosses " Not done" give out a dangerous look, like something is urgently need to be done. so, you can add process in a way like completed or not. -
Khushank94 (
talk)
07:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
i would also like to propose that a part of edit [4] be undone because -
- Khushank94 ( talk) 07:36, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Since there are too many rables (and resulst are yet to come), I have moved it t o themore encyclopaedic prose format. Also those in the party that are not competing (eg GJM) have been remvoed as that is then irrelevant here, it can go on the NDA article Lihaas ( talk) 19:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Loksabha-2014 ( talk · contribs) is creating several articles on the elections in the different states (like Indian general election, 2014 (Uttar Pradesh)), copypasting from his/her own blog with his/her own blog as reference. This clearly constitutes linkspam and as the blog is anonymous it does not conform with being WP:RS. Can we just redirect these copyvio articles, awaiting that they can be rewritten with proper sources? -- Soman ( talk) 00:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
per WP:Article size, the page is much too long and need trimming. Im doing some now, but well probs need more in a bit.( Lihaas ( talk) 16:41, 26 March 2014 (UTC)).
These both sections seem unnecessary. Celebrity candidates are media attention but here they are not useful. Retiring MPs are not retiring from politics or may come back anytime. They are just not contesting election. No need of separated box. I suggest to remove both. Nizil ( talk) 19:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
This talkpage is getting long. Can anyone Archive inactive/closed/possibly not repeatedly discussed topics and make it short? Regards, - Nizil ( talk) 15:47, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Image:ECI logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 06:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
>> Election Commission sets ball rolling for Lok Sabha polls in 2014 >> Full transcript: Stand by my report on no evidence against Modi, says SIT chief RK Raghavan to NDTV >> Infographic: How India forms a government*( Lihaas ( talk) 15:30, 8 December 2013 (UTC)).
AAP are a minor party unrepresented in parliament, that is not a reason to post them here as then every other represented party will have to be put in the infobox. Lihaas ( talk) 04:24, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
ɳ
I have reverted the edits which was edited by User:Sanatan2014, because,
Shriram Talk 12:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sriram,
If that is the case, it has to be mentioned that Wikipidea is giving publicity for only two parties and influencing people's decision by highlighting NDA and UPA. The format of the page has to be changed in such a way that all parties are recognized equally. It should not be not used for highlighting a few and mentioning others as 'other party', thus giving less importance to new parties. A few things required: 1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties 2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA 3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same 4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 16:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
The structure of the election 2014 would be such that it give equal importance to all parties. I would like to disuss the earlier mentioned points individually rather than a vague answer. Highlighting them again below
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Soorejmg ( talk) 16:38, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sriram, To simplify the question- The objective of the page should be to tell people the details of general election in a such a manner that every party contesting election gets equal importance. It should not create wrong impression on people mind from the previous election results or such historic ideas. In the page , Modi and Rajiv Gandhi alone are being pictured as main people. Until the election is complete for 2014, no one is important than other. So the format of the page should be such that all parties gets equal importance. For this purpose, 4 points which I suggested above is important. Contesting 350 seats is showing the importance that the party has the ability to keep that many candidates across country which makes it important ( that part is any way not important for the page format). I am also not asking to highlight modi based on modi trend. They are just assuming that one is going win before the actual result comes out. What we require is just a format which gives equal importance as mentioned above. Highlighting the 4 points that will guarentee equal importance to all people-
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections Soorejmg ( talk) 08:10, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I would say Wikipedia is being used now for canvasing of Rahul Gandhi and Narendra Modi, UPA and NDA. My suggestion is pretty straight forward and simple. Remove this canvasing of Modi and Rahul. Other wise gives add PM candidates /Leader of all parties. That is the least than can be done.
Could you give an inline reason for each point why it cannot be done?-
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 14:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Surpising that you are not willing to give inline answers!!!
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY first as it is a new party of high importance in INDIA after Delhi elections
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 12:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Seriously friend, give an inline comment on each point. It will clarify the points instead of deviating away.
1. The photos of PM candidates of UPA and congress has to be removed or else include PM candidates of all parties
2. Remove parties from 'other parties' in contents section and give equal importance as given to UPA and NDA
3. Make the character size of UPA NDA and AAM AADMI Party same
4 .Change the Order of Display of content- Put AAM AADMI PARTY firs if you say there no importance in the order in which parties are listed
Thanks Soorej 116.15.45.112 ( talk) 15:35, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Shriram, Waiting for your reply.
Hi EvergreenFir, Inviting you here . EvergreenFir. Help to solve this if you can.
Thanks Soorej Soorejmg ( talk) 09:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please correct the spelling of "Satewise" to "Statewise"
Dayalrajendran (
talk) 16:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Done(
Lihaas (
talk)
17:35, 5 March 2014 (UTC)).
Please update the mentioned section. Headlines Today withdraw its opinion poll result given by c-voter after controversy(sting operation done on c-voter). Thanks -- 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ☣ 18:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
The infobox information has been persistent reverted back to earlier revisions. i added a comment " not being mp doesn't specify anything. to be a leader you need to be a mp and for that seat is to be decided" to specify that seat is yet to be decided and should not be changed. And more too both of them in the infobox are leaders. the mere fact that one is a declared PM candidate and another is just not declared but he is leading the elections as Head of election campaign. that just make no difference at all to be added to infobox rather this should be added and expanded by adding it to the content of election campaign. therefore there is no need to add this "not mp" and "PM candidate" or "Head of election campaign" in the infobox
So, to counter there are no PM candidature allowed in Parlimentry Democracy - Khushank94 ( talk) 06:54, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Just Some Days or Moments ,i can say... Khushank94 ( talk) 07:25, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
need consensus...explained fully in my first comment..... Khushank94 ( talk) 15:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
NOT intersted at all Khushank94 ( talk) 08:05, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
In my view Votes Are not needed and are simply not necessary. Khushank94 ( talk) 02:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC) please provide me with a source on ECI website explaining all six together. I have just no problem with all these being here but why not decrease them to four removing the last two because they are not national parties. Khushank94 ( talk) 03:00, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
In my veiw it should be a simple thumb rule, choose one that(who) is in command. Khushank94 ( talk) 13:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Leader | Rahul Gandhi | Narendra Modi |
Leader's seat | ||
– current | Amethi | — |
– contested | — | Varanasi |
that will be a little ambiguous but you can still Go ahead you can try it out, as long as others don't revert it.
this all is needed before election afterwards it doesn't matter that they were incumbent or not. -
Khushank94 (
talk)
06:49, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
I think it's better now...Whats say? - Khushank94 ( talk) 14:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC) I was not able to swap it like that the word 'seat' came down to new row. - Khushank94 ( talk) 14:20, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
We already have SVG file for election constituency of india which was used for 2009 election results. Here Map. And map of constituency with dates of election on Election Commission website here. Can someone with vector graphics editor like Inkscape or Photoshop use both maps and create on for this article. Its easy. I do not have computer else i have done so. Regards Nizil ( talk) 13:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello. The parties section of article seems to be a victim of edit wars.
Anyway, I think here on Wikipedia things added keeping previous records in mind until new output come. On this particular note, I feel the UPA won previous general elections, they need to be mentioned first(one can make changes on Indian general election, 2019 page, if NDA wins
Indian general election, 2014). I hope wikipedians are getting what I am trying to depict. I might be wrong on this, please help.--
25 CENTS VICTORIOUS
☣
19:02, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
The ruling party (majority) gets mention first. Look at
United States presidential election, 2000 and
United States presidential election, 2004 the ruling party gets the mention first. That's Democratic in 2000 and Republican in 2004.--
Kinderlander (
talk) 04:52, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
If it is Alphabetical then Aam Aadmi Party has to be mentioned first not NDA or BJP. So it is always the ruling party that gets the first mention. And it is not alphabetical. --
Kinderlander (
talk)
04:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC) Agree
If it is alphabetical AAP will be first. But I disagree that it is alphabetical, but has to be ruling party. -- Kinderlander ( talk) 05:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
NIBODH ( talk) 03:44, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) will put up 85 candidates in nine states in the upcoming Lok Sabha polls, party general secretary Dipankar Bhattacharyya said. The party will contest seats in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Punjab, Jharkhand and in Puducherry, Mr. Bhattacharyya said at a press conference. He was accompanied by lone party MLA, Vinod Singh. Mr. Bhattacharyya expressed regret that CPI (ML)’s endeavour to forge an alliance with Left parties had not materialised. But he cautioned the Left parties about joining hands with JD (U). The move by the Left parties, including CPI and CPI (M), to forge an alliance with JD (U) is “not good” as it would only weaken them, Mr. Bhattacharyya claimed while favouring the proposed Third Front. “I would favour a Third Front as an alternative force comprising non-Congress, non-BJP parties,” he said. Demanding a mechanism for fixing prices, the CPI (ML) leader said that the inflation and prevailing corruption was at the root of all the problems plaguing the country. Mr. Bhattacharyya, who had hailed the formation of the Aam Aadmi Party government in Delhi, has supported its leader Arvind Kejriwal’s approach on the gas price issue saying it was in the country’s interest. CPI (ML) strongly opposes privatisation of any natural resource as these belong to the people of the country, he asserted. The party is also opposed to the acquisition of agricultural land for industrial purposes and recruitment on contractual basis or against honorariums, he said. Referring to the recent killing of AJSU party leader Tileshwar Sahu in Barhi, Hazaribagh, Mr. Bhattacharyya said that the killing was a sequel to a political conspiracy and should be probed by CBI.
The bombings occurred at an election rally that is pertinent to this election page.( Lihaas ( talk) 14:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)).
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Fourteen-parties-close-ranks-against-communalism/articleshow/24950421.cms lists the People's Party of Punjab as attendee, but that contradicts the Indian Express reference in the article. Any clarity on this? -- Soman ( talk) 14:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I removed the passage "The eight largest metropolises in India are considered important because they constitute 31 seats, larger than some regions altogether. In the previous election, the INC-led UPA won 24 of these seats, but the UPA is trailing in these areas." Whilst the two authors of the article in question are entitled to their opinion, the analysis is extremely thin and I see no reason for Wikipedia to reproduce the argument in this article. There has to be tens of thousands of commentaries on the Indian elections, and we cannot reproduce all.
First of all, the authors make the argument "Clearly, there was support for UPA amongst the urban, big-city Indians at the time. While these cities are spread across the country, their cosmopolitan nature and economic profile puts them closer to each other than to their immediate hinterland, in our view." Looking at the outcome of the 2009 elections, that analysis is clearly flawed. What would be the linkage between an AIMIM voter in Hyderabad and a Trinamool voter in Kolkata? In reality, Indian elections represent a myriad different scenarios, and the Trinamool vote in Kolkata should be seen in backdrop of state politics (anti-incumbency vote against WB state government), the AIMIM vote is a communal vote (not a vote for UPA as such), the Chennai situation is yet another one, Mumbai and Maharashtra has its own processes, etc., etc..
Looking at demographics, the 8 metropolis counts for 5.3% of the Lok Sabha seats. In many other countries that number would be far higher, it's quite common that the capital city alone accounts for 10-20% of the seats in a national parliament. Contrary to the argument in the "India Spend" article, it is the rural vote that is the king-maker in India, to the frustration of political pundits, twitterati, AAP and neoliberals. Remember how the pundits failed to predict the 2004 outcome? The answer lies in their bias to see correlation in strength of urban and rural votes. -- Soman ( talk) 16:23, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I think that the article has to be reconstructed somehow. The Lok Sabha poll is not a straight, US-style contest between two major national parties. Alliances such as UPA and NDA are extremely fluid and their compositions will certainly change once the results are out and ministries are being allocated. The reality is that alliances are set on state levels, and that each state has its own dynamics. For example, the UDF in Kerala is not the same as the UPA, the Kerala, the fact that the RSP is contesting as part of the UDF does not make RSP a UPA constituent. Notably in West Bengal RSP is contesting as part of the Left Front, against NDA and UPA partners. Likewise the All India Forward Bloc is a partner of the Left Front in West Bengal, but is contesting against the Left Democratic Front in Kerala. The Samajwadi Party is aligned with a third front in Jammu and Kashmir, but that alliance is limited to that state alone. Whilst seat-sharing between Janata Dal (Secular) and left parties has failed to bear fruit in Karnataka, JD(S) is allotted a seat as LDF candidate in Kerala. Etc, etc.
I propose that we: 1) Include parties, not alliances, in infobox. Prior to the election the resonable inclusion criteria is the six national parties recognised by the Election Commission. 2) Having a section on alliances, with subsections for each of the two main alliances (UPA and NDA). But no subsections on the constituent parties. 3) Having section on parties, with short subsections on the parties contesting: one each for national parties, one each for recognised state parties and others currently represented in Lok Sabha and one common subsection for 'Others' not covered in the other categories. -- Soman ( talk) 17:26, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
As per the "Pre-Poll alliance" passage, I see the following issues in quick reading:
-- Soman ( talk) 03:26, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Soman, as per the Eelection Commission of India, There are only Two Collations (Alliances) are Registered Officially which are NDA (The First Alliance Registered in 1998) and UPA registered in 2004. So General Elections are contested mainly on the basis of Alliance & Pre-poll understandings. So I request you to not add inbox with those small Parties which are not yet formed any alliance officially. Let them Join together and form alliance then, lets consider 75 million of votes... You can add their Details in Parties Menu - Other Sub Menu.. Warm Regards.. Sanatan2014 ( talk) 07:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
( Logical1004) & Soman Samajwadi Party & Trinamool Congress are not National Parties. Please Remove the same.. Warm Regards Sanatan2014 ( talk) 09:42, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
The undersigned user condemn the use of words "advani drama" by an editor and would like the user to Assume good faith.
The undersigned user would like to ask the editor to refrain from using such words.- Khushank94 ( talk) 09:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
According to < /info/en/?search=Indian_general_election,_2009>: Seats won by INC, BJP and CPI(M) are 262 159 79 respectively. However, this page erroneously describes: Last election 119,110,776 votes (28.55%), 206 seats 78,435,538 (18.80%), 116 seats 25,728,889 votes (6.17%), 21 seats
Could someone please fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BharathSampath93 ( talk • contribs) 19:27, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
this article is about INDIA and here we don't use any such word such as provinces. so, why not change it with states or others where ever needed see this , [2]. - Khushank94 ( talk) 14:19, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
A few more photos of public meetings and banners extra should be added to the article. Thanks Shyamsunder ( talk) 12:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
This was done int he previous multi-phase UP election during the process to indicate where ti is. When it is done then it is removed altogether. Its sort of an idnciator of an iongoing event as the page is read during the phases. [3]( Lihaas ( talk) 16:29, 23 March 2014 (UTC)).
it's alright to add process but those big crosses " Not done" give out a dangerous look, like something is urgently need to be done. so, you can add process in a way like completed or not. -
Khushank94 (
talk)
07:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
i would also like to propose that a part of edit [4] be undone because -
- Khushank94 ( talk) 07:36, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Since there are too many rables (and resulst are yet to come), I have moved it t o themore encyclopaedic prose format. Also those in the party that are not competing (eg GJM) have been remvoed as that is then irrelevant here, it can go on the NDA article Lihaas ( talk) 19:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Loksabha-2014 ( talk · contribs) is creating several articles on the elections in the different states (like Indian general election, 2014 (Uttar Pradesh)), copypasting from his/her own blog with his/her own blog as reference. This clearly constitutes linkspam and as the blog is anonymous it does not conform with being WP:RS. Can we just redirect these copyvio articles, awaiting that they can be rewritten with proper sources? -- Soman ( talk) 00:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
per WP:Article size, the page is much too long and need trimming. Im doing some now, but well probs need more in a bit.( Lihaas ( talk) 16:41, 26 March 2014 (UTC)).
These both sections seem unnecessary. Celebrity candidates are media attention but here they are not useful. Retiring MPs are not retiring from politics or may come back anytime. They are just not contesting election. No need of separated box. I suggest to remove both. Nizil ( talk) 19:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
This talkpage is getting long. Can anyone Archive inactive/closed/possibly not repeatedly discussed topics and make it short? Regards, - Nizil ( talk) 15:47, 29 March 2014 (UTC)