Talk:2015 French regional elections

13+5 are not 27

User:Number 57 should read the sources, and don't decide by herself what is the number of the Regions of France. Reverting.

Moreover, I am not sure that desinfoboxes are useful at all, that was the reason of my editorial choice to not provide this kind of space eater. But if any, we surely need tu use the same kind of box as in the other members of the sequence. Changing accordingly.

Pldx1 (talk) 22:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

And Pldx1 also (sarcasm !). Pldx1 (talk) 22:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

The Rübezahl property. Final version, according to chap II, art 5 of LOI n° 2015-29 , op. cit. Pldx1 (talk) 23:19, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

@Pldx1: If you want editors to read the sources, maybe you should include some – the article is currently unreferenced. You'll also need to edit Regions of France, as that's where I got my figure of 27 from. I'd also advise improving your attitude towards other editors trying to improve Wikipedia - try being constructive rather than being arsey. Number 57

@Number 57: Dear Number 57, in all of the versions of this page, starting from its creation, the second paragraph is written as follows:

The ballot will be ruled according to the "LOI n° 2015-29 du 16 janvier 2015 relative à la délimitation des régions, aux élections régionales et départementales et modifiant le calendrier électoral". Legifrance.

If you want so, you can click on the link given in the article and go to the text of the law. I am not sure that this text is cristal clear, but this is the one and only authoritative source. This was the reason for only saying 'Regions' in my initial version. In an attempt to follow your lead, I have tried to write something about the will be number of the French Regions (roughly as of 2016-01-04, after the ballots and some additionnal processes). But this is not so simple to describe this 13+5=(12+1)+(2+2+1)=(12+2)+(1+1+1)+1 micmac in a single line.

About your remark that someone 'need to edit Regions of France', I have nothing against that. Be bold if you want to. As for myself, such edit should not only describe, but explain why such a tricky set of rules has been adopted. All the best with that !

Pldx1 (talk) 08:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Candidates?

Why at French regional elections, 2015#First round is there a column labeled "Candidates"? Don't the parties have different candidates in every region of the country? Should this column be labeled "Party leader" or something like that instead? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:24, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't know, but please leave the candidate names in place as it'll break the template if you remove them. Find another template if you want a different layout instead. Maswimelleu (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

First Round Table

Is there a reason it is separated into "Left-Wing", "Right-Wing", and "Far-Right"? It would make more sense to have either "Left"/"Right" or "Left"/"Right"/"Far-Left"/"Far-Right". The Left Front and French Communist Party would easily fall under the label of far left.

The current divisions seem arbitrary rather than methodical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.127.239.146 (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I believe those are the standard labels used in French politics. Bondegezou (talk) 11:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

The table is based on a translation of the French article, where the divisions seem to be standard. Since there's not really a significant leftist list opposing the centre-left one, it's not really relevant to include a tally. The election is a three-cornered race between far-right, centre-right, and left, so I wouldn't support including total sections for very minor alliances. You can play with the table more if you want, but I found that table to be significantly better than simply having an unsorted table of only major parties. Presenting the information this way demonstrates that left-wing lists have actually been doing fairly well - this wasn't apparent before given that having only 'major parties' made it look at though the far-right unity around the FN dwarfed any other significant voting bloc. Maswimelleu (talk) 11:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Voting system

Can we have some text about the runoff voting system used? There are some rules to determine who goes to the second round, something about the top two candidates, but you include more if the gap between second place and the others is small...??? I can't remember and I can't find anything right now. Bondegezou (talk) 11:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Translate the French article. It says that any candidate with more than 10% of the vote can proceed to the runoff. Only the Presidentials have to top two candidates rule enforced, although in practice we often see third-placed challengers drop out of the race due to the remote possibility of victory in the second round. The gap between challengers has no bearing, it's down to percentages polled by each candidate in the first round. That's why most races in mainland France are three-cornered between a left-unity list, a right-unity list, and the FN. Maswimelleu (talk) 11:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Bondegezou (talk) 11:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem, I added more translated text into that section to remove some ambiguities. Maswimelleu (talk) 12:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Individual Regions' Results

Can someone with a knowledge of French copy them over from the French Wikipedia? Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkbw50 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

You don't need knowledge of French. Just use the machine translation that's offered in the tag at the top of the article. Clean up any errors that appear in the English as a result. The most difficult part is making sure all the tables display properly when you import them as the French code will be linking to templates that we don't have on English Wikipedia. Maswimelleu (talk) 18:46, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

First party - Second party - Third party

The votes and percentages for LR and PS are actually those for lists that included mostly LR-UDI-MODEM-CNIP and "miscellaneous right", and mostly PS-PRG-MRC, and sometimes other left-wing parties. I can't remember any French election for which UMP/LR or PS each contended alone, they always lead lists with a various array of satellite parties. This is also true for legislative and departemental elections as there is at least a candidate and a deputy (2 c + 2 d in departemental elections). --Minorities observer (talk) 11:32, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

How would you prefer to present the information? I copied the French language presentation of the results, but I can't figure out how to show it accurately in the infobox. Maswimelleu (talk) 11:10, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I think we need to show it via alliance on the infobox, as opposed to party. Currently the first round results on the infobox show a mixture of single party and combined ticket results, whereas the second round results show combined tickets only. The French language article uses a very different style, although I think we should just change 'party' to 'alliance' in the infobox and make the presentation of combined tickets clear. The only issue is that in overseas departments the PS fought some DVG tickets, meaning that combining their two vote totals together exaggerates the result of left-wing parties. If anyone can think of a good way to present these results over two rounds (preferably graphically) whilst making these united lists apparent then they should edit the infobox. I may try doing something based on French wikipedia later, although I may experiment in my sandbox first. Maswimelleu (talk) 09:54, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

A part of the problem comes from the labels used by the Interior Ministry, for the 1st round "Liste Union de la Gauche" ("LUG") are listed separately from "Liste du Parti Socialiste". Actually, LUG were mostly PS + minor parties PRG, MRC, UDE (itself a federation of several tiny recent ecologist splinter parties) lists, so neither "purely" PS nor really "Union de la Gauche", as the largest non-PS left-wing parties (EELV, PCF, PG) were mostly not included. The same problem occurred for the Departemental elections in march, to minorize the results of joint EELV-FDG (or PG) lists their results were counted as "divers gauche", a label usually designed for dissident PS, PRG or MRC lists/candidates (+ the overseas lists/candidates not affiliated with a metropolitan party. The Regionalist label includes left-wing parties (Simeoni in Corsica was elected as Euro-MP on an EELV list supported by the federation of regionalist parties R&PS) as well as more centrist (or "mixed") ones. --Minorities observer (talk) 09:29, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Far right?

Arent the FN socialists? How can they be far right? EEEEEE1 (talk) 19:36, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Socialists? I'm not aware of any reputable source calling them that. Far-right is a designation used on their article as well as being a translation of extrême droite, which is what they're called on the French article. The FN may support the welfare state, but that does not make them socialists. If anything, they're being opportunistic and attempting to appeal to a cross-section of French society by offering these policies, rather than basing them in left-wing thought. Maswimelleu (talk) 21:46, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I think National conservative is a better name for them, instead of far right. Far-right often refers to Nazis and such. Do you think it is a bit unfair for the Communists to just be "Left" while FN is "Far right"? The Communists are a lot more left than FN is right. Marquis de Faux (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources call them far right, so we call them far right. Bondegezou (talk) 13:44, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

How to display second round results?

I started making a table to concisely show the results of the second round of the elections. I am not sure whether it is a good layout.

If it's useful, feel free to modify it and/or add it to the article. Chessrat ^{(talk,contributions)} 23:47, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Region	Union of the Right	Union of the Left	National Front
Alsace-Champagne-Ardenne-Lorraine	Philippe Richert 1,060,029 (48.4%)	Jean-Pierre Masseret 339,749 (15.51%)	Florian Philippot 790,141 (36.08%)
Aquitaine-Limousin-Poitou-Charentes	Virginie Calmels 798,142 (34.06%)	Alain Rousset 1,037,330 (44.27%)	Jacques Colombier 507,660 (21.67%)
Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes
Bourgogne-Franche-Comté
Brittany
Centre-Val de Loire
Corsica
French Guiana
Guadeloupe
Île-de-France
Languedoc-Roussillon-Midi-Pyrénées
La Réunion
Martinique
Nord-Pas-de-Calais-Picardy
Normandy
Pays de la Loire
Provence-Alpes-Côte_d'Azur

I like it, might be a good idea to make both this table and the table I imported from the French wiki collapsible. We also need a table that presents the number of seats won by each list, given that this article makes only sparse mention of the fact that regional council seats are up for election as well. Maswimelleu (talk) 08:02, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, agree with Maswimelleu. We need more on the council seats. Bondegezou (talk) 10:21, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Bondegezou. I have imported the results for the council seats from the French language article now. This article could use a more thorough translation of the French language prose to improve. Currently it's mostly a wall of tables and stats, rather than a clear explanation of the election. It suffers from a severe lack of context, with little explanation of how the 3 main lists organised themselves or how campaigning took place. Maswimelleu (talk) 19:11, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Move Communists and Left Front to "Far Left"?

It seems unfair for National Front to be categorized as "Far Right" while the Communists are just "Left". The Communists are way more left than National Front is right.

Marquis de Faux (talk) 20:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on French regional elections, 2015. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151220093601/http://www.odoxa.fr/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Odoxa-pour-BFMTV-et-le-Parisien-Aujourdhui-en-France-Rapport-de-force-aux-%C3%A9lections-r%C3%A9gionales.pdf to http://www.odoxa.fr/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Odoxa-pour-BFMTV-et-le-Parisien-Aujourdhui-en-France-Rapport-de-force-aux-%C3%A9lections-r%C3%A9gionales.pdf

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).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:05, 7 October 2017 (UTC)