This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Instant-runoff voting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Instant-runoff voting was copied or moved into History and use of instant-runoff voting with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I suggest this Voters in IRV elections rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially sorted by the first preference marked on them and that is used to establish the number of votes for each candidate. If a candidate has more than half of the first-choice votes, that candidate wins and the vote count is finished. If not, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and the vote cast for that candidate is transferred to the candidate marked as their next choice. That process continues until one candidate has more than half of the votes, and that person is declared the winner. During the process some ballots may run through all their marked preferences in which case they are declared "exhausted" - the winning formula then becomes more than half of the votes still in play. 174.3.203.119 ( talk) 21:13, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Efbrazil See here; it's not clear at all how much this has affected the article, but better safe than sorry while we work that out and go over it. (Notices have been added to FairVote and other related articles.) – Maximum Limelihood Estimator 22:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
@ David Eppstein when you said this isn't unique to the US, did you mean conflating ranked voting and IRV isn't unique to the US? Or that the term "Ranked-choice voting" in particular is common in Australia? I was under the impression that the term "Ranked-choice voting" for IRV was limited to North America, with Australians making the similar mistake of calling it "preferential voting". Closed Limelike Curves ( talk) 01:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Instant-runoff voting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Instant-runoff voting was copied or moved into History and use of instant-runoff voting with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I suggest this Voters in IRV elections rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially sorted by the first preference marked on them and that is used to establish the number of votes for each candidate. If a candidate has more than half of the first-choice votes, that candidate wins and the vote count is finished. If not, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and the vote cast for that candidate is transferred to the candidate marked as their next choice. That process continues until one candidate has more than half of the votes, and that person is declared the winner. During the process some ballots may run through all their marked preferences in which case they are declared "exhausted" - the winning formula then becomes more than half of the votes still in play. 174.3.203.119 ( talk) 21:13, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Efbrazil See here; it's not clear at all how much this has affected the article, but better safe than sorry while we work that out and go over it. (Notices have been added to FairVote and other related articles.) – Maximum Limelihood Estimator 22:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
@ David Eppstein when you said this isn't unique to the US, did you mean conflating ranked voting and IRV isn't unique to the US? Or that the term "Ranked-choice voting" in particular is common in Australia? I was under the impression that the term "Ranked-choice voting" for IRV was limited to North America, with Australians making the similar mistake of calling it "preferential voting". Closed Limelike Curves ( talk) 01:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)