This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
2008 United States presidential election in Iowa was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " Did you know?" column on January 10, 2008. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
Wikipedia is not a news site; it's an encyclopedia. Don't both with the results until the final ones are given.-- Bedford ( talk) 02:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
There's the county convention on March 15th, which I'll be attending as a bystander. Something could be mentioned about this.
Also, there appear to be vote totals at CNN.com for Iowa. This isn't the first time that the media have got it wrong, only to be corrected later. Just looking at the Linn County results at CNN, it definitely looks like a vote total. I'm pretty sure that these are the sign in sheet totals: when people attended the caucus on Jan 4th, everyone was required to sign in with their name, address, and mark who they supported.
It makes sense. The delegate totals were called in (there were 10 delegates at my precinct, 360+ people). The sign in sheets would take quite a while to count.
I'd be willing do sum the data from CNN in a spreadsheet and/or find the results somewhere else so that we could have a popular vote total.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=IA
C. Nelson ( talk) 04:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
How are the delegates alloted calculated? If it is a percentage from the 57 total delegates Obama should have 22 delegates, not 16; and 17 for Clinton and Edwards. Is it not 57 delegates? Is there a different way to calculate, CNN says we should scrap the ones with less than 15%, done that... changes nothing. Also, if my calculations are righ(they are rounded, since I can't think of a way to send 0.45 of a delegate) what happens to the 1 delegate that is not alloted to anybody because of the rounding. I think this is a important thing to elucidate in this and other related articles Chico ( talk) 05:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
the results should be placed at the top so that the reader doesn't have to scroll down to find them. Kingturtle ( talk) 10:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not much of a Wikipedia editor, so I thought I'd bring my issue up here rather than make a change immediately. The first paragraph states:
Of the eight major Democratic Presidential candidates, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois received the most support from Iowa Democratic caucus-attendees, making him the first person of African descent of any party to carry the caucus.
I understand it can be a touchy issue, but black American or African American would work better than person of African descent. It's generally accepted (especially by evolutionary biologists) that all humans are of African descent. The Wikipedia entry for Barack Obama describes him as African American, so I think that should be used here as well. -- Sdcrym ( talk) 21:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
This article is about a subject which is (technically) currently on-going and thus meets one of the Quick Fail Criteria. Please re-nominate when the event in question is concluded. -- jackturner3 ( talk) 14:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
It would seem Obama has taken some of Edwards delegates. I've expressed this by bracketing the old delegate counts and adding a note below the table. Andareed ( talk) 00:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
What happened to the 2,501st state delegate? The total for the first contest is 2,501 but for the second one it is 2,500. – Zntrip 04:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The District Results Total percent (by adding Obama + Clinton + Edwards) doesn't come close to 100%. Either there's a line missing (uncommited?) or else some of the results aren't in yet. Jon ( talk) 18:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Irrelevant and dated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.199.158.54 ( talk) 17:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Can someone find a link for a 'how to' register/participate in this? I need to know if I have to register as a Republican to participate.-- Shink X 20:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
This article says that the caucuses are straw polls, but Straw poll says that the term is used for an unofficial vote (e.g. Ames Straw Poll). So how can the caucuses themselves be straw polls if delegates are being actually elected? Kelvinc ( talk) 05:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
the results should be placed at the top so that the reader doesn't have to scroll down to find them. Kingturtle ( talk) 10:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
The article is written as if the Ames Straw Poll and the January 2008 caucuses are roughly equivalent in importance, something that (arguably) favors the Romney camp (which won the Ames poll). I don't know enough about the matter to be bold and rewrite the article, but would like to hear the opinions of other editors about this.
If the article were changed, the Ames poll should still be mentioned, but the January 2008 results should be much more prominent in the lead section, and the section with the Ames poll results should be below the section with the details of the January 2008 poll (compare and contrast), I think. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 16:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
None of the results at either the Des Moines Register, CNN, and The Green Papers show any votes for John Cox and Alan Keyes, who were apparently active candidates. Did Cox and Keyes get 0 votes? Marmaduque ( talk) 19:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
IMO, the column about potential national delegates should be taken out, mainly because in updating the table to reflect all precincts reporting, I inadvertantly removed the sourcing for that, but also because it's speculation and different news sources were reporting different things last night. USAToday or Washington Post (can't remember which) had Huck 30, Mitt 7 and the rest with none; the previous citation of thegreenpapers had the current numbers which were far more spread out and even gave Giuliani a delegate despite getting less than 3.5%; and CNN was somewhere in the middle. I would take it out myself, but I don't want to mess up the table. Kingnavland ( talk) 11:22 PM EST, January 4th, 2008, too lazy to log-in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.33.166.39 ( talk) 04:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
For consistency and aesthetics, can we please use in this article the same results boxes that are used in Results of the 2008 Democratic Presidential primaries? They look like this:
Iowa caucus | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Candidate | % | State delegates | National delegates | |
Barack Obama | 37.58% | 940 | ||
John Edwards | 29.75% | 744 | ||
Hillary Clinton | 29.47% | 737 | ||
Bill Richardson | 2.11% | 55 | ||
Joe Biden | 0.93% | 23 | ||
Christopher Dodd | 0.02% | 1 | ||
Mike Gravel | 0.00% | 0 | ||
Dennis Kucinich | 0.00% | 0 | ||
Uncommitted | 0.14% | 3 | ||
Turnout | 100.0 | 2,501 |
Thanks! Kingturtle ( talk) 12:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
United States presidential election in Iowa, 2008. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on United States presidential election in Iowa, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Iowa Democratic caucuses, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Iowa Democratic caucuses, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://creepysleepy.com/2007/12/15/creepy-sleepy-132-the-iowa-caucus-explained-analyzed-awesome/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Iowa Republican caucuses, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
2008 United States presidential election in Iowa was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " Did you know?" column on January 10, 2008. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
Wikipedia is not a news site; it's an encyclopedia. Don't both with the results until the final ones are given.-- Bedford ( talk) 02:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
There's the county convention on March 15th, which I'll be attending as a bystander. Something could be mentioned about this.
Also, there appear to be vote totals at CNN.com for Iowa. This isn't the first time that the media have got it wrong, only to be corrected later. Just looking at the Linn County results at CNN, it definitely looks like a vote total. I'm pretty sure that these are the sign in sheet totals: when people attended the caucus on Jan 4th, everyone was required to sign in with their name, address, and mark who they supported.
It makes sense. The delegate totals were called in (there were 10 delegates at my precinct, 360+ people). The sign in sheets would take quite a while to count.
I'd be willing do sum the data from CNN in a spreadsheet and/or find the results somewhere else so that we could have a popular vote total.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#val=IA
C. Nelson ( talk) 04:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
How are the delegates alloted calculated? If it is a percentage from the 57 total delegates Obama should have 22 delegates, not 16; and 17 for Clinton and Edwards. Is it not 57 delegates? Is there a different way to calculate, CNN says we should scrap the ones with less than 15%, done that... changes nothing. Also, if my calculations are righ(they are rounded, since I can't think of a way to send 0.45 of a delegate) what happens to the 1 delegate that is not alloted to anybody because of the rounding. I think this is a important thing to elucidate in this and other related articles Chico ( talk) 05:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
the results should be placed at the top so that the reader doesn't have to scroll down to find them. Kingturtle ( talk) 10:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not much of a Wikipedia editor, so I thought I'd bring my issue up here rather than make a change immediately. The first paragraph states:
Of the eight major Democratic Presidential candidates, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois received the most support from Iowa Democratic caucus-attendees, making him the first person of African descent of any party to carry the caucus.
I understand it can be a touchy issue, but black American or African American would work better than person of African descent. It's generally accepted (especially by evolutionary biologists) that all humans are of African descent. The Wikipedia entry for Barack Obama describes him as African American, so I think that should be used here as well. -- Sdcrym ( talk) 21:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
This article is about a subject which is (technically) currently on-going and thus meets one of the Quick Fail Criteria. Please re-nominate when the event in question is concluded. -- jackturner3 ( talk) 14:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
It would seem Obama has taken some of Edwards delegates. I've expressed this by bracketing the old delegate counts and adding a note below the table. Andareed ( talk) 00:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
What happened to the 2,501st state delegate? The total for the first contest is 2,501 but for the second one it is 2,500. – Zntrip 04:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The District Results Total percent (by adding Obama + Clinton + Edwards) doesn't come close to 100%. Either there's a line missing (uncommited?) or else some of the results aren't in yet. Jon ( talk) 18:07, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Irrelevant and dated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.199.158.54 ( talk) 17:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
Can someone find a link for a 'how to' register/participate in this? I need to know if I have to register as a Republican to participate.-- Shink X 20:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
This article says that the caucuses are straw polls, but Straw poll says that the term is used for an unofficial vote (e.g. Ames Straw Poll). So how can the caucuses themselves be straw polls if delegates are being actually elected? Kelvinc ( talk) 05:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
the results should be placed at the top so that the reader doesn't have to scroll down to find them. Kingturtle ( talk) 10:06, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
The article is written as if the Ames Straw Poll and the January 2008 caucuses are roughly equivalent in importance, something that (arguably) favors the Romney camp (which won the Ames poll). I don't know enough about the matter to be bold and rewrite the article, but would like to hear the opinions of other editors about this.
If the article were changed, the Ames poll should still be mentioned, but the January 2008 results should be much more prominent in the lead section, and the section with the Ames poll results should be below the section with the details of the January 2008 poll (compare and contrast), I think. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 16:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
None of the results at either the Des Moines Register, CNN, and The Green Papers show any votes for John Cox and Alan Keyes, who were apparently active candidates. Did Cox and Keyes get 0 votes? Marmaduque ( talk) 19:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
IMO, the column about potential national delegates should be taken out, mainly because in updating the table to reflect all precincts reporting, I inadvertantly removed the sourcing for that, but also because it's speculation and different news sources were reporting different things last night. USAToday or Washington Post (can't remember which) had Huck 30, Mitt 7 and the rest with none; the previous citation of thegreenpapers had the current numbers which were far more spread out and even gave Giuliani a delegate despite getting less than 3.5%; and CNN was somewhere in the middle. I would take it out myself, but I don't want to mess up the table. Kingnavland ( talk) 11:22 PM EST, January 4th, 2008, too lazy to log-in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.33.166.39 ( talk) 04:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
For consistency and aesthetics, can we please use in this article the same results boxes that are used in Results of the 2008 Democratic Presidential primaries? They look like this:
Iowa caucus | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Candidate | % | State delegates | National delegates | |
Barack Obama | 37.58% | 940 | ||
John Edwards | 29.75% | 744 | ||
Hillary Clinton | 29.47% | 737 | ||
Bill Richardson | 2.11% | 55 | ||
Joe Biden | 0.93% | 23 | ||
Christopher Dodd | 0.02% | 1 | ||
Mike Gravel | 0.00% | 0 | ||
Dennis Kucinich | 0.00% | 0 | ||
Uncommitted | 0.14% | 3 | ||
Turnout | 100.0 | 2,501 |
Thanks! Kingturtle ( talk) 12:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
United States presidential election in Iowa, 2008. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 13:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on United States presidential election in Iowa, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Iowa Democratic caucuses, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Iowa Democratic caucuses, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://creepysleepy.com/2007/12/15/creepy-sleepy-132-the-iowa-caucus-explained-analyzed-awesome/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Iowa Republican caucuses, 2008. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)