![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
So, after looking at this page, I see that some of the prose on here is identical to the prose on the 2019 Canadian federal election page. The prose was added there by consensus when we wanted to put that page in the In the News section of Wikipedia. I'm also planning on adding an analysis section and election aftermath section to the 2019 Canadian federal election page. In fact, some of the prose in the results section can fit in the former. And the latter needs to be added due to some ramifications the election has had already. We've also had an election aftermath section in previous elections, so that will probably need to be added anyways.
To continue, I was looking at other elections for other countries like the UK 2017 general election and I saw that it separated prose and and tables. However, in the past for Canadian elections the prose was in a separate article like this one (the Results page). But, that doesn't seem practical to me. So, I was wondering if we should separate the prose and the tables. The prose/analysis should be on the 2019 Canadian election page since we already reached consensus that there should be prose there and the tables should be on this page. If we don't solve it, we'll have two repetitive pages. A preview of what I am proposing can be seen when we look at the UK pages : Results_breakdown_of_the_2017_United_Kingdom_general_election Results_of_the_2017_United_Kingdom_general_election Edit: I need to add that I'm in favor of keeping simple tables on the main page but moving the more detailed stuff here.
It's a question of consistency vs practicality. Although, if we do the changes that I propose, we can simply go back to previous Canadian elections and make the changes there as well. -- MikkelJSmith ( talk) 15:04, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm starting work on a consolidated table of riding results, much like what is seen over at Results of the 2017 United Kingdom general election. So far, the Alberta part of it has been set up and looks like this:
Riding |
Prov/ Terr |
Last elctn |
Winning party | Turnout | Votes | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Party | Votes | Share | Mjrty | Lib | Con | NDP | Bloc | Green | PPC | Ind | Other | Total | ||||||
Banff—Airdrie | AB | Con | Con | 54,580 | 71.3% | 46,364 | 74.7% | 8,216 | 54,580 | 7,960 | – | 3,230 | 2,609 | – | – | 76,595 | ||
Battle River—Crowfoot | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Bow River | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Centre | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Confederation | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Forest Lawn | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Heritage | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Midnapore | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Nose Hill | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Rocky Ridge | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Shepard | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Signal Hill | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Skyview | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Centre | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Griesbach | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Manning | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Mill Woods | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Riverbend | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Strathcona | AB | NDP | NDP | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton West | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton—Wetaskiwin | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Foothills | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Fort McMurray—Cold Lake | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Grande Prairie—Mackenzie | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Lakeland | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Lethbridge | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Peace River—Westlock | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Red Deer—Lacombe | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Red Deer—Mountain View | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
St. Albert—Edmonton | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Sturgeon River—Parkland | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Yellowhead | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – |
Being fully sortable, it promises to provide lots of opportunity to analyze all results at the riding level, once all 338 are in place. When I finish it, should I insert it in full, or default to autocollapse to save space on the screen? Your comments are appreciated. Raellerby ( talk) 13:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
Here's the table, as far as Alberta goes:
Results by riding - 2019 Canadian federal election [1] | |||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Riding |
Prov/ Terr [a 1] |
2015 | Winning party | Turnout [a 2] |
Votes [a 3] | ||||||||||||||
Party | Votes | Share | Margin # |
Margin % |
Lib | Con | NDP | Bloc | Green | PPC | Ind | Other | Total | ||||||
Banff—Airdrie | AB | Con | Con | 55,504 | 71.1% | 47,079 | 60.3% | 73.1% | 8,425 | 55,504 | 8,185 | – | 3,315 | 2,651 | – | – | 78,080 | ||
Battle River—Crowfoot | AB | Con | Con | 53,309 | 85.5% | 50,124 | 80.4% | 77.3% | 2,557 | 53,309 | 3,185 | – | 1,689 | 1,620 | – | – | 62,360 | ||
Bow River | AB | Con | Con | 46,279 | 83.9% | 43,106 | 78.2% | 70.1% | 3,173 | 46,279 | 3,086 | – | 826 | 1,321 | – | 453 | 55,138 | ||
Calgary Centre | AB | Lib | Con | 37,306 | 56.6% | 19,535 | 29.7% | 69.4% | 17,771 | 37,306 | 6,516 | – | 2,853 | 907 | 138 | 373 | 65,864 | ||
Calgary Confederation | AB | Con | Con | 36,312 | 55.1% | 21,404 | 32.5% | 72.2% | 14,908 | 36,312 | 7,312 | – | 5,700 | 1,136 | – | 524 | 65,892 | ||
Calgary Forest Lawn | AB | Con | Con | 23,805 | 59.6% | 15,115 | 37.8% | 53.5% | 8,690 | 23,805 | 4,227 | – | 1,318 | 1,089 | 388 | 447 | 39,964 | ||
Calgary Heritage | AB | Con | Con | 40,817 | 70.7% | 32,760 | 56.8% | 70.9% | 8,057 | 40,817 | 5,278 | – | 2,027 | 1,123 | 228 | 185 | 57,715 | ||
Calgary Midnapore | AB | Con | Con | 50,559 | 74.3% | 43,052 | 63.2% | 73.2% | 7,507 | 50,559 | 6,445 | – | 1,992 | 1,585 | – | – | 68,088 | ||
Calgary Nose Hill | AB | Con | Con | 38,588 | 69.8% | 29,885 | 54.0% | 66.9% | 8,703 | 38,588 | 5,304 | – | 1,554 | 1,089 | – | 71 | 55,309 | ||
Calgary Rocky Ridge | AB | Con | Con | 48,253 | 68.3% | 35,241 | 49.9% | 72.3% | 13,012 | 48,253 | 6,051 | – | 2,011 | 1,053 | 270 | – | 70,650 | ||
Calgary Shepard | AB | Con | Con | 58,614 | 75.0% | 49,970 | 63.9% | 70.2% | 8,644 | 58,614 | 6,828 | – | 2,345 | 1,709 | – | – | 78,140 | ||
Calgary Signal Hill | AB | Con | Con | 44,421 | 70.0% | 34,699 | 54.7% | 72.1% | 9,722 | 44,421 | 5,355 | – | 2,139 | 1,130 | – | 711 | 63,478 | ||
Calgary Skyview | AB | Lib | Con | 26,533 | 52.5% | 12,206 | 24.1% | 60.7% | 14,327 | 26,533 | 7,540 | – | 800 | 603 | – | 749 | 50,552 | ||
Edmonton Centre | AB | Lib | Con | 22,006 | 41.4% | 4,482 | 8.4% | 65.4% | 17,524 | 22,006 | 10,959 | – | 1,394 | 805 | 119 | 285 | 53,092 | ||
Edmonton Griesbach | AB | Con | Con | 24,120 | 51.4% | 12,320 | 26.2% | 57.5% | 8,100 | 24,120 | 11,800 | – | 1,189 | 1,074 | 216 | 464 | 46,963 | ||
Edmonton Manning | AB | Con | Con | 30,425 | 55.9% | 18,733 | 34.4% | 61.5% | 11,692 | 30,425 | 9,555 | – | 1,255 | 1,109 | – | 344 | 54,380 | ||
Edmonton Mill Woods | AB | Lib | Con | 26,736 | 50.3% | 8,857 | 16.7% | 69.0% | 17,879 | 26,736 | 6,422 | – | 968 | 953 | – | 219 | 53,177 | ||
Edmonton Riverbend | AB | Con | Con | 35,126 | 57.4% | 21,088 | 34.5% | 71.0% | 14,038 | 35,126 | 9,332 | – | 1,797 | 855 | – | – | 61,148 | ||
Edmonton Strathcona | AB | NDP | NDP | 26,823 | 47.3% | 5,788 | 10.2% | 73.7% | 6,592 | 21,035 | 26,823 | – | 1,152 | 941 | – | 202 | 56,745 | ||
Edmonton West | AB | Con | Con | 35,719 | 60.9% | 23,907 | 40.8% | 66.6% | 11,812 | 35,719 | 8,537 | – | 1,441 | 1,126 | – | – | 58,635 | ||
Edmonton—Wetaskiwin | AB | Con | Con | 63,346 | 72.4% | 52,544 | 60.1% | 71.4% | 10,802 | 63,346 | 9,820 | – | 1,660 | 1,616 | – | 211 | 87,455 | ||
Foothills | AB | Con | Con | 53,872 | 82.1% | 50,016 | 76.3% | 76.6% | 3,856 | 53,872 | 3,767 | – | 2,398 | 1,698 | – | – | 65,591 | ||
Fort McMurray—Cold Lake | AB | Con | Con | 40,706 | 79.9% | 35,858 | 70.3% | 65.6% | 4,848 | 40,706 | 2,883 | – | 865 | 1,674 | – | – | 50,976 | ||
Grande Prairie—Mackenzie | AB | Con | Con | 51,198 | 84.0% | 46,953 | 77.0% | 72.4% | 2,910 | 51,198 | 4,245 | – | 1,134 | 1,492 | – | – | 60,979 | ||
Lakeland | AB | Con | Con | 48,314 | 83.9% | 44,586 | 77.4% | 73.6% | 2,565 | 48,314 | 3,728 | – | 1,105 | 1,468 | – | 398 | 57,578 | ||
Lethbridge | AB | Con | Con | 40,713 | 65.8% | 31,603 | 51.1% | 70.5% | 8,443 | 40,713 | 9,110 | – | 1,939 | 1,007 | – | 670 | 61,882 | ||
Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner | AB | Con | Con | 42,045 | 79.2% | 37,406 | 70.4% | 68.1% | 3,528 | 42,045 | 4,639 | – | 1,203 | 1,350 | 337 | – | 53,102 | ||
Peace River—Westlock | AB | Con | Con | 41,659 | 80.7% | 37,773 | 73.1% | 70.4% | 3,148 | 41,659 | 3,886 | – | 1,377 | 1,579 | – | – | 51,649 | ||
Red Deer—Lacombe | AB | Con | Con | 53,843 | 79.8% | 47,831 | 70.9% | 72.8% | 3,540 | 53,843 | 6,012 | – | 1,596 | 2,453 | – | – | 67,444 | ||
Red Deer—Mountain View | AB | Con | Con | 54,765 | 80.3% | 49,819 | 73.1% | 76.8% | 3,795 | 54,765 | 4,946 | – | 2,026 | 2,637 | – | – | 68,169 | ||
Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan | AB | Con | Con | 53,600 | 73.4% | 44,733 | 61.2% | 77.0% | 7,357 | 53,600 | 8,867 | – | 1,592 | 1,334 | – | 300 | 73,050 | ||
St. Albert—Edmonton | AB | Con | Con | 39,506 | 60.7% | 27,029 | 41.5% | 70.7% | 12,477 | 39,506 | 9,895 | – | 1,594 | 1,268 | – | 351 | 65,091 | ||
Sturgeon River—Parkland | AB | Con | Con | 53,235 | 77.5% | 46,295 | 67.4% | 74.2% | 4,696 | 53,235 | 6,940 | – | 1,745 | 1,625 | – | 416 | 68,657 | ||
Yellowhead | AB | Con | Con | 45,964 | 82.1% | 42,066 | 75.2% | 76.2% | 2,912 | 45,964 | 3,898 | – | 1,272 | 1,592 | – | 330 | 55,968 |
There's an awful lot more data at a glance on hand than what's available elsewhere. I'm moving forward to get all 338 ridings done. Raellerby ( talk) 19:10, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
References
The new swing analysis has problems. First, if the heading is lost, then negative values imply gains, not losses. Second, if you're going to display negatives, we use an en-dash (–) not a hyphen (-). That applies to the change column as well. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 01:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
−
, or inserting Alt+8722 (minus sign) using the numeric keypad (as explained under
WP:HTMD). This is very nice to know.
Raellerby (
talk)
22:48, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
The official voting results from Elections Canada have a number of discrepancies with the current version of this Wikipedia article. For example, our article says the Green Party received 1,162,361 votes while Elections Canada lists the Green Party total as 1,189,607 [1]. Mathew5000 ( talk) 10:26, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
I noticed a similar discrepancy. Our provincial vote tables copy Elections Canada's provincial vote tables, which still don't show 100% reporting. When compared to Table 12 on the EC website, there are more total votes provincially(at least for Manitoba) and federally than their summary tables, which suggests to me that Table 12 represents 100% reporting - or at least closer to that than EC's summary tables. If I use a computer to calculate provincial vote share from Table 12 would that be considered original research? Jethro 82 ( talk) 22:01, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Sorry.. The table "Distribution of seats and popular vote %, by party by province/territory (2019)" was the only wikipedia table I was looking at. It matches exactly the data found at https://enr.elections.ca/National.aspx?lang=e and https://enr.elections.ca/Provinces.aspx?lang=e . This data mostly has reporting rates of between 99 and 100% on Elections Canada's website. While this is not generally a big deal, the data is off by more than a tenth of a percentage point here and there with the tallies a computer program I wrote to help forecast elections that uses date from table 12 as it's baseline. At first I thought I had got it wrong, so I had my computer program spit out the total votes it was using for the various regions(it lumps the east coast in as a single polling region), compared this data to the enr part of the website and my tallies were all higher(with the enr website having reporting of less than 100%). I took one of the two fourteen seat provinces, summed up the table rows and got the same tally that both you and my program did. which is why I think the numbers in "Distribution of seats and popular vote %, by party by province/territory (2019)" are off. Jethro 82 ( talk) 19:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
@ MikkelJSmith2 and Tuesp1985: Some comments about turnout. I will use Manitoba as an example.
Mathew5000 ( talk) 21:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Infobox legislative election is used on the 2015, 2011 and 2008 pages, using it is consistent with them. WanukeX ( talk) 16:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
An anon pointed out an error in the Berthier—Maskinongé entry. Did somebody use the preliminary numbers for the table instead of the validated ones? G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 23:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
So, after looking at this page, I see that some of the prose on here is identical to the prose on the 2019 Canadian federal election page. The prose was added there by consensus when we wanted to put that page in the In the News section of Wikipedia. I'm also planning on adding an analysis section and election aftermath section to the 2019 Canadian federal election page. In fact, some of the prose in the results section can fit in the former. And the latter needs to be added due to some ramifications the election has had already. We've also had an election aftermath section in previous elections, so that will probably need to be added anyways.
To continue, I was looking at other elections for other countries like the UK 2017 general election and I saw that it separated prose and and tables. However, in the past for Canadian elections the prose was in a separate article like this one (the Results page). But, that doesn't seem practical to me. So, I was wondering if we should separate the prose and the tables. The prose/analysis should be on the 2019 Canadian election page since we already reached consensus that there should be prose there and the tables should be on this page. If we don't solve it, we'll have two repetitive pages. A preview of what I am proposing can be seen when we look at the UK pages : Results_breakdown_of_the_2017_United_Kingdom_general_election Results_of_the_2017_United_Kingdom_general_election Edit: I need to add that I'm in favor of keeping simple tables on the main page but moving the more detailed stuff here.
It's a question of consistency vs practicality. Although, if we do the changes that I propose, we can simply go back to previous Canadian elections and make the changes there as well. -- MikkelJSmith ( talk) 15:04, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
I'm starting work on a consolidated table of riding results, much like what is seen over at Results of the 2017 United Kingdom general election. So far, the Alberta part of it has been set up and looks like this:
Riding |
Prov/ Terr |
Last elctn |
Winning party | Turnout | Votes | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Party | Votes | Share | Mjrty | Lib | Con | NDP | Bloc | Green | PPC | Ind | Other | Total | ||||||
Banff—Airdrie | AB | Con | Con | 54,580 | 71.3% | 46,364 | 74.7% | 8,216 | 54,580 | 7,960 | – | 3,230 | 2,609 | – | – | 76,595 | ||
Battle River—Crowfoot | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Bow River | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Centre | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Confederation | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Forest Lawn | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Heritage | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Midnapore | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Nose Hill | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Rocky Ridge | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Shepard | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Signal Hill | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Calgary Skyview | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Centre | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Griesbach | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Manning | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Mill Woods | AB | Lib | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Riverbend | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton Strathcona | AB | NDP | NDP | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton West | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Edmonton—Wetaskiwin | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Foothills | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Fort McMurray—Cold Lake | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Grande Prairie—Mackenzie | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Lakeland | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Lethbridge | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Peace River—Westlock | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Red Deer—Lacombe | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Red Deer—Mountain View | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
St. Albert—Edmonton | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Sturgeon River—Parkland | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – | ||||||||||||
Yellowhead | AB | Con | Con | % | % | – |
Being fully sortable, it promises to provide lots of opportunity to analyze all results at the riding level, once all 338 are in place. When I finish it, should I insert it in full, or default to autocollapse to save space on the screen? Your comments are appreciated. Raellerby ( talk) 13:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
Here's the table, as far as Alberta goes:
Results by riding - 2019 Canadian federal election [1] | |||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Riding |
Prov/ Terr [a 1] |
2015 | Winning party | Turnout [a 2] |
Votes [a 3] | ||||||||||||||
Party | Votes | Share | Margin # |
Margin % |
Lib | Con | NDP | Bloc | Green | PPC | Ind | Other | Total | ||||||
Banff—Airdrie | AB | Con | Con | 55,504 | 71.1% | 47,079 | 60.3% | 73.1% | 8,425 | 55,504 | 8,185 | – | 3,315 | 2,651 | – | – | 78,080 | ||
Battle River—Crowfoot | AB | Con | Con | 53,309 | 85.5% | 50,124 | 80.4% | 77.3% | 2,557 | 53,309 | 3,185 | – | 1,689 | 1,620 | – | – | 62,360 | ||
Bow River | AB | Con | Con | 46,279 | 83.9% | 43,106 | 78.2% | 70.1% | 3,173 | 46,279 | 3,086 | – | 826 | 1,321 | – | 453 | 55,138 | ||
Calgary Centre | AB | Lib | Con | 37,306 | 56.6% | 19,535 | 29.7% | 69.4% | 17,771 | 37,306 | 6,516 | – | 2,853 | 907 | 138 | 373 | 65,864 | ||
Calgary Confederation | AB | Con | Con | 36,312 | 55.1% | 21,404 | 32.5% | 72.2% | 14,908 | 36,312 | 7,312 | – | 5,700 | 1,136 | – | 524 | 65,892 | ||
Calgary Forest Lawn | AB | Con | Con | 23,805 | 59.6% | 15,115 | 37.8% | 53.5% | 8,690 | 23,805 | 4,227 | – | 1,318 | 1,089 | 388 | 447 | 39,964 | ||
Calgary Heritage | AB | Con | Con | 40,817 | 70.7% | 32,760 | 56.8% | 70.9% | 8,057 | 40,817 | 5,278 | – | 2,027 | 1,123 | 228 | 185 | 57,715 | ||
Calgary Midnapore | AB | Con | Con | 50,559 | 74.3% | 43,052 | 63.2% | 73.2% | 7,507 | 50,559 | 6,445 | – | 1,992 | 1,585 | – | – | 68,088 | ||
Calgary Nose Hill | AB | Con | Con | 38,588 | 69.8% | 29,885 | 54.0% | 66.9% | 8,703 | 38,588 | 5,304 | – | 1,554 | 1,089 | – | 71 | 55,309 | ||
Calgary Rocky Ridge | AB | Con | Con | 48,253 | 68.3% | 35,241 | 49.9% | 72.3% | 13,012 | 48,253 | 6,051 | – | 2,011 | 1,053 | 270 | – | 70,650 | ||
Calgary Shepard | AB | Con | Con | 58,614 | 75.0% | 49,970 | 63.9% | 70.2% | 8,644 | 58,614 | 6,828 | – | 2,345 | 1,709 | – | – | 78,140 | ||
Calgary Signal Hill | AB | Con | Con | 44,421 | 70.0% | 34,699 | 54.7% | 72.1% | 9,722 | 44,421 | 5,355 | – | 2,139 | 1,130 | – | 711 | 63,478 | ||
Calgary Skyview | AB | Lib | Con | 26,533 | 52.5% | 12,206 | 24.1% | 60.7% | 14,327 | 26,533 | 7,540 | – | 800 | 603 | – | 749 | 50,552 | ||
Edmonton Centre | AB | Lib | Con | 22,006 | 41.4% | 4,482 | 8.4% | 65.4% | 17,524 | 22,006 | 10,959 | – | 1,394 | 805 | 119 | 285 | 53,092 | ||
Edmonton Griesbach | AB | Con | Con | 24,120 | 51.4% | 12,320 | 26.2% | 57.5% | 8,100 | 24,120 | 11,800 | – | 1,189 | 1,074 | 216 | 464 | 46,963 | ||
Edmonton Manning | AB | Con | Con | 30,425 | 55.9% | 18,733 | 34.4% | 61.5% | 11,692 | 30,425 | 9,555 | – | 1,255 | 1,109 | – | 344 | 54,380 | ||
Edmonton Mill Woods | AB | Lib | Con | 26,736 | 50.3% | 8,857 | 16.7% | 69.0% | 17,879 | 26,736 | 6,422 | – | 968 | 953 | – | 219 | 53,177 | ||
Edmonton Riverbend | AB | Con | Con | 35,126 | 57.4% | 21,088 | 34.5% | 71.0% | 14,038 | 35,126 | 9,332 | – | 1,797 | 855 | – | – | 61,148 | ||
Edmonton Strathcona | AB | NDP | NDP | 26,823 | 47.3% | 5,788 | 10.2% | 73.7% | 6,592 | 21,035 | 26,823 | – | 1,152 | 941 | – | 202 | 56,745 | ||
Edmonton West | AB | Con | Con | 35,719 | 60.9% | 23,907 | 40.8% | 66.6% | 11,812 | 35,719 | 8,537 | – | 1,441 | 1,126 | – | – | 58,635 | ||
Edmonton—Wetaskiwin | AB | Con | Con | 63,346 | 72.4% | 52,544 | 60.1% | 71.4% | 10,802 | 63,346 | 9,820 | – | 1,660 | 1,616 | – | 211 | 87,455 | ||
Foothills | AB | Con | Con | 53,872 | 82.1% | 50,016 | 76.3% | 76.6% | 3,856 | 53,872 | 3,767 | – | 2,398 | 1,698 | – | – | 65,591 | ||
Fort McMurray—Cold Lake | AB | Con | Con | 40,706 | 79.9% | 35,858 | 70.3% | 65.6% | 4,848 | 40,706 | 2,883 | – | 865 | 1,674 | – | – | 50,976 | ||
Grande Prairie—Mackenzie | AB | Con | Con | 51,198 | 84.0% | 46,953 | 77.0% | 72.4% | 2,910 | 51,198 | 4,245 | – | 1,134 | 1,492 | – | – | 60,979 | ||
Lakeland | AB | Con | Con | 48,314 | 83.9% | 44,586 | 77.4% | 73.6% | 2,565 | 48,314 | 3,728 | – | 1,105 | 1,468 | – | 398 | 57,578 | ||
Lethbridge | AB | Con | Con | 40,713 | 65.8% | 31,603 | 51.1% | 70.5% | 8,443 | 40,713 | 9,110 | – | 1,939 | 1,007 | – | 670 | 61,882 | ||
Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner | AB | Con | Con | 42,045 | 79.2% | 37,406 | 70.4% | 68.1% | 3,528 | 42,045 | 4,639 | – | 1,203 | 1,350 | 337 | – | 53,102 | ||
Peace River—Westlock | AB | Con | Con | 41,659 | 80.7% | 37,773 | 73.1% | 70.4% | 3,148 | 41,659 | 3,886 | – | 1,377 | 1,579 | – | – | 51,649 | ||
Red Deer—Lacombe | AB | Con | Con | 53,843 | 79.8% | 47,831 | 70.9% | 72.8% | 3,540 | 53,843 | 6,012 | – | 1,596 | 2,453 | – | – | 67,444 | ||
Red Deer—Mountain View | AB | Con | Con | 54,765 | 80.3% | 49,819 | 73.1% | 76.8% | 3,795 | 54,765 | 4,946 | – | 2,026 | 2,637 | – | – | 68,169 | ||
Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan | AB | Con | Con | 53,600 | 73.4% | 44,733 | 61.2% | 77.0% | 7,357 | 53,600 | 8,867 | – | 1,592 | 1,334 | – | 300 | 73,050 | ||
St. Albert—Edmonton | AB | Con | Con | 39,506 | 60.7% | 27,029 | 41.5% | 70.7% | 12,477 | 39,506 | 9,895 | – | 1,594 | 1,268 | – | 351 | 65,091 | ||
Sturgeon River—Parkland | AB | Con | Con | 53,235 | 77.5% | 46,295 | 67.4% | 74.2% | 4,696 | 53,235 | 6,940 | – | 1,745 | 1,625 | – | 416 | 68,657 | ||
Yellowhead | AB | Con | Con | 45,964 | 82.1% | 42,066 | 75.2% | 76.2% | 2,912 | 45,964 | 3,898 | – | 1,272 | 1,592 | – | 330 | 55,968 |
There's an awful lot more data at a glance on hand than what's available elsewhere. I'm moving forward to get all 338 ridings done. Raellerby ( talk) 19:10, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
References
The new swing analysis has problems. First, if the heading is lost, then negative values imply gains, not losses. Second, if you're going to display negatives, we use an en-dash (–) not a hyphen (-). That applies to the change column as well. Walter Görlitz ( talk) 01:42, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
−
, or inserting Alt+8722 (minus sign) using the numeric keypad (as explained under
WP:HTMD). This is very nice to know.
Raellerby (
talk)
22:48, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
The official voting results from Elections Canada have a number of discrepancies with the current version of this Wikipedia article. For example, our article says the Green Party received 1,162,361 votes while Elections Canada lists the Green Party total as 1,189,607 [1]. Mathew5000 ( talk) 10:26, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
I noticed a similar discrepancy. Our provincial vote tables copy Elections Canada's provincial vote tables, which still don't show 100% reporting. When compared to Table 12 on the EC website, there are more total votes provincially(at least for Manitoba) and federally than their summary tables, which suggests to me that Table 12 represents 100% reporting - or at least closer to that than EC's summary tables. If I use a computer to calculate provincial vote share from Table 12 would that be considered original research? Jethro 82 ( talk) 22:01, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Sorry.. The table "Distribution of seats and popular vote %, by party by province/territory (2019)" was the only wikipedia table I was looking at. It matches exactly the data found at https://enr.elections.ca/National.aspx?lang=e and https://enr.elections.ca/Provinces.aspx?lang=e . This data mostly has reporting rates of between 99 and 100% on Elections Canada's website. While this is not generally a big deal, the data is off by more than a tenth of a percentage point here and there with the tallies a computer program I wrote to help forecast elections that uses date from table 12 as it's baseline. At first I thought I had got it wrong, so I had my computer program spit out the total votes it was using for the various regions(it lumps the east coast in as a single polling region), compared this data to the enr part of the website and my tallies were all higher(with the enr website having reporting of less than 100%). I took one of the two fourteen seat provinces, summed up the table rows and got the same tally that both you and my program did. which is why I think the numbers in "Distribution of seats and popular vote %, by party by province/territory (2019)" are off. Jethro 82 ( talk) 19:53, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
@ MikkelJSmith2 and Tuesp1985: Some comments about turnout. I will use Manitoba as an example.
Mathew5000 ( talk) 21:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Infobox legislative election is used on the 2015, 2011 and 2008 pages, using it is consistent with them. WanukeX ( talk) 16:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
An anon pointed out an error in the Berthier—Maskinongé entry. Did somebody use the preliminary numbers for the table instead of the validated ones? G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 23:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)