Talk:2024 British Columbia general election
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2024 British Columbia general election article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 366 days  |
 | This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Polls from Angus Reid
editI am unable to find some polls to find the polls in graphs [1] (november 2020 and March 2021) Braganza (talk) 06:07, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- For the two Angus Reid polls in the table for Nov 2020, both sets of numbers come from subsets of the same poll, as seen in the detailed results: http://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2020.12.09_Province_Spotlight-PR-Tables.pdf
- The difference comes from using "currently support" and "likely to support." I suggest we use the numbers they chose to publish in their main November report, and ignore their numbers in past vote intent graphs. What a mess! Lilactree201 (talk) 10:00, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- Which ones did they publish? "Currently" or "Likely"? —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- "Currently" Lilactree201 (talk) 02:14, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
- Which ones did they publish? "Currently" or "Likely"? —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
new map issues
edithi Talleyrand6
Truncation: the right side of the image is truncated in the thumbnail and full view as seen here.
Contrast: the current very light grey colour of the ridings make distinguishing the white riding borders very difficult. The previous image used a much darker grey where this wasn't an issue.
Additionally, I would set the initial values at "0.0%"... we don't format zero values with double digits. You can also save visual space by removing the "BC" in front of every party name since the image is clearly about BC (i.e. just "New Democratic" "United" "Conservative" "Green").
Finally, per MOS:ABBR and sentence case, the title should be "2024 BC general election" and subsequent heads should be:
- "93 seats in assembly"
- "47 for majority"
And the "Vote %" should have a space between "vote" and "%". —Joeyconnick (talk) 22:53, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
- It seems another issue affecting this is the decision to use teal for BC United at Template talk:Canadian party colour/Archive 3#RfC: British Columbia United. That was also discussed at Talk:BC United#Colour. While I was in the camp advocating pink, we seemed to have lost the argument. If we are going to switch to pink, some discussion is likely required.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 23:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, the legend is cut off on the right side of the map we are currently using in the article (Option 2). Perhaps we should revert to the Option 1 map, at least until these issues raised by Joeyconnick are resolved.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 19:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Since this thread started it seems like the map was changed from one by Tallyrand6 to a similar one by Matthew McMullin, but I wanted to reopen the question of BC United's map colour. The Wikibox and the template are using teal, but the map still uses pink. It would be ideal to align these. --CaelemSG (talk) 2024-06-15 18:54 (UTC)
Issues Section
editThis section seems to be a WP:OR table relying only on party platforms and arguably no reliable sources. Furthermore, MOS:USEPROSE suggests that we should use prose not use a table for this information. Should we blow the section up and start over?-- Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Getting rid of it would be okay by me. —Joeyconnick (talk) 17:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems like these issues/platform sections are not included in the articles for the last few BC elections. I think it can be dealt with in a campaign section that sets out relevant details in prose.-- Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 19:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not a fan of these sections; just because people use Wikipedia as an election resource doesn't mean it actually is. We should only cover issues that are flashpoints in the campaign. — Kawnhr (talk) 19:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
United/Conservative Merger talks
editWe should probably mention this somewhere.[2][3][4][5] Not sure where in the article is appropriate, perhaps in a new "Campaign" section. That might be easier to do in the coming weeks, if something actually comes of it.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 18:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Former BCU candidates
editCan we add a symbol to denote former BCU candidates in the candidate list, at least until it becomes clear which ones agree to withdraw, which ones, if any, choose to run as independents and which ones, if any, end up running as Conservatives? Wellington Bay (talk) 19:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps a separate table might be more appropriate for analyzing the fate of all these candidates, as current reports suggest that the situation is quite fluid right now. We might be seeing the rise of a situation similar to what happened in Australia with their Teal independents.Raellerby (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- The need for this table is already obvious. After doing a headcount from the information in this article, I noted how many candidates there were, and how many of those had been incumbent MLAs. It was reverted on the grounds that there were many more of both. If that bald assertion is true, we need a table showing all the nominees, with separate columns showing withdrawals, switches to other parties, and those who are continuing to campaign as independents. I don't know where to start to compile the whole story, so I'll defer this task to those who can.Raellerby (talk) 14:05, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Here is a raw unsorted table based on all the entries made in this article, on the fate of the various BCU candidates. The only intensive verification so far is for the incumbents running. Obviously not ready for insertion in the mainspace, and corrections will be cheerfully accepted:Raellerby (talk) 19:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
![[1]](https://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/word-image-77676-6.png){kind=link}
- = Incumbent MLA