This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
WikiProject Indian politics page. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
India Project‑class | |||||||
|
Politics Project‑class | |||||||
|
Hi, can someone join me in this discussion to help me figure out what is the status of some of these legislators from the 15th Andhra Pradesh Assembly, especially when they have left the party (initially won) to join the other but haven't officially considered by the Speaker since that would have disqualified them from the party as per the anti-defectipn law. Now while some of the legislators party is reflected in the article, the others isn't. It is quite confusing and I seek your comments. Thank you. 456legend talk 01:58, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I have all the Indian general election articles on my watchlist, and I see endless edit warring on them, primarily over (a) which parties to include beyond the main two and (b) images of party leaders.
Can I suggest than Indian general elections adopt {{ Infobox legislative election}}, which allows all parties to have won seats to be listed and has no images of party leaders, which should end the edit warring? As an example this is what the 1967 election article could look like (although it would need someone to fill in the missing party leaders). Despite listing all 20 parties, it takes up less space than the version with only five parties. It also has the advantage of avoiding using images of party leaders like this, which always looks a bit odd.
It is also possible to split the infobox up into national parties, state parties and other (like this). Cheers, Number 5 7 14:37, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
The major contenders should not be removed from infobox after the results are declared even if they get 0 seats, because they "were" the major contenders "during" the election.It would be beneficial to discuss and document who the major contenders were during an election (all the Indian historical general elections), in my opinion. Maybe this could be achieved by setting a realistic standard?
A lot of surveys don't mention their margin of error, there could be even surveys without margin of error as they are confident enough about forecasting the exact numbers in the result. If they come from reliable sources and renowned news agencies, I think it still can be added with mentioning N/A for margin of error. For pre-poll surveys, I thing the numbers are the most important things. Any unreliable survey-conducting agency can also publish the datas with mentioning the sample size and margin of error. Hence I think things like margin of error are not must-need-things, the reliability of the publisher should be the criteria. What are the views of you guys about this? Ku423winz1 ( talk) 09:40, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
WikiProject Indian politics page. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
India Project‑class | |||||||
|
Politics Project‑class | |||||||
|
Hi, can someone join me in this discussion to help me figure out what is the status of some of these legislators from the 15th Andhra Pradesh Assembly, especially when they have left the party (initially won) to join the other but haven't officially considered by the Speaker since that would have disqualified them from the party as per the anti-defectipn law. Now while some of the legislators party is reflected in the article, the others isn't. It is quite confusing and I seek your comments. Thank you. 456legend talk 01:58, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I have all the Indian general election articles on my watchlist, and I see endless edit warring on them, primarily over (a) which parties to include beyond the main two and (b) images of party leaders.
Can I suggest than Indian general elections adopt {{ Infobox legislative election}}, which allows all parties to have won seats to be listed and has no images of party leaders, which should end the edit warring? As an example this is what the 1967 election article could look like (although it would need someone to fill in the missing party leaders). Despite listing all 20 parties, it takes up less space than the version with only five parties. It also has the advantage of avoiding using images of party leaders like this, which always looks a bit odd.
It is also possible to split the infobox up into national parties, state parties and other (like this). Cheers, Number 5 7 14:37, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
The major contenders should not be removed from infobox after the results are declared even if they get 0 seats, because they "were" the major contenders "during" the election.It would be beneficial to discuss and document who the major contenders were during an election (all the Indian historical general elections), in my opinion. Maybe this could be achieved by setting a realistic standard?
A lot of surveys don't mention their margin of error, there could be even surveys without margin of error as they are confident enough about forecasting the exact numbers in the result. If they come from reliable sources and renowned news agencies, I think it still can be added with mentioning N/A for margin of error. For pre-poll surveys, I thing the numbers are the most important things. Any unreliable survey-conducting agency can also publish the datas with mentioning the sample size and margin of error. Hence I think things like margin of error are not must-need-things, the reliability of the publisher should be the criteria. What are the views of you guys about this? Ku423winz1 ( talk) 09:40, 17 March 2024 (UTC)