Hello, Buenovale! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for
your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place
{{helpme}} on your
talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to
sign your name on talk pages by clicking
![]() |
---|
|
|
Happy editing! Peaceray ( talk) 21:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate
your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to
Touch of Evil, it appears that you have added
original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses
combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a
reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the
tutorial on citing sources. Thank you.
Peaceray (
talk)
21:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Touch of Evil. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. If you want to claim that an allegation is inaccurate, you need to provide a source that explicitly states as much. DonIago ( talk) 17:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
There are indeed better ways to handle and resolve things than your current behaviour at Next Catalan regional election and, formerly, 2024 European Parliament election in Spain. Edit summaries are not for resolving disputes, and if your edits are the ones in dispute it's up to you to seek a consensus. Imposing your edits against long-standing versions, then demanding others to discuss themselves or you will keep reverting them, is basically disruptive and against Wikipedia policies. Cheers. Impru20 talk 14:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
"Some countries do not use explicit thresholds, but nonetheless their electoral system imposes an implicit threshold, based mainly on the district magnitude (number of seats per constituency)". In this case, the D'Hondt method is the electoral method at use. The sentence you keep reverting is basically what the source says but applied to the specific case of this election. You are being openly disruptive and should abide to Wikipedia policies: if you make a bold edit and are reverted, then discuss, don't re-revert. Impru20 talk 14:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
"Some countries do not use explicit thresholds, but nonetheless their electoral system imposes an implicit threshold, based mainly on the district magnitude (number of seats per constituency)". The electoral system in Catalonia (and in Spain) uses the D'Hondt method. The articles also explain that such method is used. You were offered an alternative wording: that
"The use of the electoral method may result in an effective threshold based on the district magnitude and the distribution of votes among candidacies". This addressed your raised issues, yet you keep reverting and changing versions over and over again. You refuse to answer here and have even called be "obfuscated" and to "don't bother" you. Let me ask you one more time: this is all that you have to say? Cheers. Impru20 talk 14:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
"The use of the electoral method results in an effective threshold based on the district magnitude and the distribution of votes among candidacies"as a compromise.
"In smaller constituencies, the use of the electoral method results in an effective threshold based on the district magnitude and the distribution of votes among candidacies"as a compromise.
Hello, Buenovale! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for
your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place
{{helpme}} on your
talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to
sign your name on talk pages by clicking
![]() |
---|
|
|
Happy editing! Peaceray ( talk) 21:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate
your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to
Touch of Evil, it appears that you have added
original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses
combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a
reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the
tutorial on citing sources. Thank you.
Peaceray (
talk)
21:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Touch of Evil. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. If you want to claim that an allegation is inaccurate, you need to provide a source that explicitly states as much. DonIago ( talk) 17:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
There are indeed better ways to handle and resolve things than your current behaviour at Next Catalan regional election and, formerly, 2024 European Parliament election in Spain. Edit summaries are not for resolving disputes, and if your edits are the ones in dispute it's up to you to seek a consensus. Imposing your edits against long-standing versions, then demanding others to discuss themselves or you will keep reverting them, is basically disruptive and against Wikipedia policies. Cheers. Impru20 talk 14:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
"Some countries do not use explicit thresholds, but nonetheless their electoral system imposes an implicit threshold, based mainly on the district magnitude (number of seats per constituency)". In this case, the D'Hondt method is the electoral method at use. The sentence you keep reverting is basically what the source says but applied to the specific case of this election. You are being openly disruptive and should abide to Wikipedia policies: if you make a bold edit and are reverted, then discuss, don't re-revert. Impru20 talk 14:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
"Some countries do not use explicit thresholds, but nonetheless their electoral system imposes an implicit threshold, based mainly on the district magnitude (number of seats per constituency)". The electoral system in Catalonia (and in Spain) uses the D'Hondt method. The articles also explain that such method is used. You were offered an alternative wording: that
"The use of the electoral method may result in an effective threshold based on the district magnitude and the distribution of votes among candidacies". This addressed your raised issues, yet you keep reverting and changing versions over and over again. You refuse to answer here and have even called be "obfuscated" and to "don't bother" you. Let me ask you one more time: this is all that you have to say? Cheers. Impru20 talk 14:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
"The use of the electoral method results in an effective threshold based on the district magnitude and the distribution of votes among candidacies"as a compromise.
"In smaller constituencies, the use of the electoral method results in an effective threshold based on the district magnitude and the distribution of votes among candidacies"as a compromise.