Talk:2016 Taiwanese general election/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about 2016 Taiwanese general election. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Potential Candidates

Is 賴清德 considered a potential candidate? I'm sure I read that before. Can some one with better Chinese than me see if they can find a source for that?Christap (talk) 16:00, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

I added him to the list, with reference. – Kaihsu (talk) 20:05, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Split

I don't see the need to split this article – we have single articles for elections in most other countries where they are held together (e.g. Guinea-Bissau general election, 2014, Malawian general election, 2014, Namibian general election, 2014, Nigerian general election, 2015, Tanzanian general election, 2015 etc. Number 5 7 19:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

These are two separate sets of elections that coincide. They are not always held on the same day by law, but this time it has been set on the same day. Please see entries for previous years for analogous instances. In fact, the text in the article right now is totally wrong; i.e. containing counterfactual information. Sorry for not waiting for consensus, but I am going to revert to the split version that is correct. – Kaihsu (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

The same is true for Guinea-Bissau - the last time the elections were held on the same day was 1999, but we still have combined articles for the years where they were held together. What in the article is wrong? Please do not revert until there is consensus. Number 5 7 17:27, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

If you are going to merge, please read the article carefully to make sure things are factual and clear. Alternatively, revert to an earlier merged version and amend with the updates. Now the text in the article is wrong. For example, the National Assembly never elected the Legislative Yuan. – Kaihsu (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

The other, minor issue is about the interwiki links. Now it points to the presidential election elsewhere, which is not strictly ontologically correct but not a big problem. – Kaihsu (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Unless I'm being blind, it doesn't say that the National Assembly elected the Legislative Yuan; it says the National Assembly elected the President and Vice President. The text is identical to that in the articles you tried to split it to. Number 5 7 17:34, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Change Title to "Republic of China General/ Presidential Election, 2016"

The original Chinese title is "Republic of China Presidential Election, 2016". The title of English version of the article should accurately reflect that.

Regarding choosing "general" versus "presidential", please see the debate above about splitting the election article.

The name of this article is set according to the name of the article on the country. Currently this is Taiwan. If you want this page to move, you will need to get Taiwan moved first. Number 5 7 08:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

The title name should change to "Republic of China Presidential Election, 2016".Marxistfounder (talk) 11:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Disagree: I believe that the English Wikipedia community has already made a move towards using Taiwan in articles, and consequently election articles, if appropriate, should be re-named or reverted back to Taiwan to maintain consistency --Sleepingstar (talk) 23:50, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Agree: The official name has always been the Republic of China since 1912 whether you like it or not. Even when the whole English Wikipedia community think that Holland is the country name (instead of the Netherlands), wrong is wrong. That's what Wikipedia is all about, to give the fact and true information, not based on general consensus. Chongkian (talk) 13:51, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

The long-running practice has been to name the election page "Republic of China presidential election, YEAR". See Republic of China presidential election, 2012, Republic of China presidential election, 2008, Republic of China presidential election, 2004, Republic of China presidential election, 2000, and Republic of China presidential election, 1996. There is no reason why this page should not have the same name. The official name of the country remains the Republic of China, Taiwan is the colloquial/geographical name. FOARP (talk) 12:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Polls should be sortable by date

It would be nice for the table of poll results to be sortable by date (probably by using ISO 8601). – Kaihsu (talk) 16:49, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

It should be ordered by date anyway as far as I am aware. Number 5 7 18:59, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

In response to the above suggestions, I've edited the polling section, and updated the polls to include all those that assess the three-way race. The default setting of the table is sorted by date, but it is a sortable wikitable which the reader can choose to sort by any field at one's leisure.

I've also removed the line of text:

“

Opinion polls are generally considered to be unreliable in Taiwan; one newspaper might publish a poll that shows a completely opposite result from that published by another newspaper. However, their accuracy has improved significantly in recent years. Most polls show a consistent 20-point lead for Tsai.

”

There doesn't appear to be any corresponding bibliographic sources for the statement - making it rather weak. However, I do welcome it's re-insertion should reliable sources be obtained and recorded on the page.

--Sleepingstar (talk) 23:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Infobox election

I've made some edits to the infobox elections:

I don't believe the pan-blue and pan-green alliance classification is particularly meaningful for the purpose of this election - indeed James Soong may be commonly classified as pan-blue, but in this election the people first party have taken on a very ambiguous stand, and in the example of the Taipei 4 constituency, the DPP has chosen not to nominate a candidate and support the PFP's candidate.
I've put in some polling numbers.
I've taken out Shih Ming-teh for now. He has yet to become eligible presidential candidate. The other candidates have already reached the legal threshold to become presidential candidates (i.e. their nominating parties obtained 5% of the nation-wide vote in the previous presidential and/or legislative elecion). Shih Ming-teh needs get a petition signed by at least 1.5% of the number of eligible voters, before gaining elgibility status. Furthermore, he is not the only candidates seeking petition, so is Hsu Jung-Shu, chair of the People Party.

--Sleepingstar (talk) 00:05, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Distinguish Republic of China general election, 2016 and Republic of China presidential election, 2016

as per zh ver.Distinguish zh:2016年中華民國中央公職人員選舉 and zh:2016年中華民國總統選舉. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenk0113 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Different language Wikipedias approach these types of elections differently, and the most common method on the English Wikipedia is to do combined elections. As an example, we have combined articles for Mozambican general election, 2014 and Ghanaian general election, 2012, but the French and German Wikipedias separate them. Number 5 7 23:29, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

But this does not mean that it can not be written, if writing were willing to edit!! why not?Zenk0113 (talk) 04:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Because it can be done in one article. No need to create a fork. Why can't you add the information here? Number 5 7 11:48, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Cross-language links between the entry of integrity! In addition, as long as someone is willing to edit the contents of why not? For this project two elections introduced in detail. In addition, the vast majority of content items are introduced presidential election? Why not normalize the entry name? Use the entry name more appropriate. Zenk0113 (talk) 01:05, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

This page can be expanded many times over (and far more detail included) before there is a need to split it – it's only 20% of the recommended page maximum size (and many are larger). All those articles pointed out above cope with unmatched interwikis. Number 5 7 19:53, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I do somehow agree at this moment of time to combine both elections, because it happens at the same time, and also the content of the article is not long at all. If we were to create two articles, there will just be too much redundancy at each of those 2 articles (probably 60-70% same content). So I suggest to keep it this way first. When things become too long, then only we shall separate it. Redirect (whether presidential election, legislative election, use ROC name, use Taiwan name .. whatever) can always solve those problems temporarily at this time. Chongkian (talk) 04:37, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

It should be separated to Republic of China presidential election, 2016 and Republic of China legislative election, 2016.Marxistfounder (talk) 08:57, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Why? Why is this any different to the examples cited above? Number 5 7 20:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

I would support splitting the article. All the previous articles were separate for presidential and legislative elections. Why joining them now? The elections are held on the same day but in the future this may well be different. --Furfur^{⁂ Diskussion} 19:56, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Listing of candidates and parties

I suggest that before ballot numbers are drawn, the candidate listing in the infobox be listed in alphabetical order according to the candidates' family names (Chu, Soong, Tsai as of Nov. 18). In the party primaries section, I suggest that the parties also be listed in alphabetical order (DPP, KMT, PFP, TSU) and the opinion polling of the parties be listed in order of number of seats in the current legislature. Tjs2012 (talk) 02:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Opinion Polling

There seems to be a significant lag in the polling data on the English page. I had previously created a series of graphs based on the raw data I collected for the Chinese Wikipedia page, of which a few will be updated in a few days following the last set of polls that will be released prior to the black-out period commencing on the 5th of January, as demanded by an article of the Republic of China (Taiwan)'s election and recall law. I wonder whether it might be easier if the polling tables were just deleted from this page, and replaced with the graphs below (unless the tables are updated to match the Chinese Wikipedia page). --Sleepingstar (talk) 01:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Nationwide polling for the Taiwan at-large legislative election of 2016.

Seat projections for the Taiwan at-large legislative election of 2016.

Please split the articles into presidential election and legislative election

This practice has been used for every other Taiwanese/ROC election and it makes it much clearer for the readers to understand. It does not make sense to put them into the same article anyway as they are two different elections. Lmmnhn (talk) 11:04, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The answer is to merge the other articles. Combining them is standard practice except in cases where the combined article would be far too long. See e.g. Nigerian general election, 2015, Sudanese general election, 2015, Tanzanian general election, 2015. Number 5 7 16:51, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I do not know why you have to cite the examples of the African countries but ignore the fact that United States presidential election, 2016, United States House of Representatives elections, 2016 and United States Senate elections, 2016 are all separate articles, and so are United Kingdom general election, 2015 and United Kingdom local elections, 2015. More importantly, see Republic of China presidential election, 2012 and Republic of China legislative election, 2012. Please follow the standard practice of previous ROC elections. At the end of the day, they are two DIFFERENT elections. Btw, one of the examples you cited does have separate articles for different elections, see Tanzanian parliamentary election, 2015, Lmmnhn (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I cite those examples as they account for the vast, vast majority of national election articles – the US is pretty much the only example of a country where there is split (although I'm sure you'll manage to find one more just to "prove" your point). If you need further evidence (and not just from Africa), see Bolivian general election, 2014, Bosnian general election, 2014, Brazilian general election, 2014, Macedonian general election, 2014, Argentine general election, 2015, Central African general election, 2015–16, Ghanaian general election, 2016, Nigerien general election, 2016, Peruvian general election, 2016, Ugandan general election, 2016, Uruguayan general election, 2014, Zambian general election, 2016 amongst others. (Your UK example is not relevant, as that is a split between national and local elections, which is a rather different matter).

As I said, I think we should actually be looking at combining past articles, rather than using them as an example to needlessly split this one. Number 5 7 18:58, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I see you have taken part in many of those articles you cited. I thank for your contributions but I am just not convinced. In Taiwanese media they are portrayed as different elections and they are DIFFERENT elections. I do not see any reason you can be convinced, so let's follow the wikipedia guidelines and hold a vote which included the contributors of the page.Lmmnhn (talk) 22:14, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The election is referred to as a "general election" by English language media, both internationally and in Taiwan, e.g.:

Number 5 7 22:50, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

google search "taiwan general election -national" About 295.000 results; "taiwan presidential election -president" goole serach "taiwan presidential election -president" About 310.000 results.Lmmnhn (talk) 15:57, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I would say split them into three articles: One about the "general election", the legislative election, and the presidential election. The two elections, "The "general election" would be the "mother article", and the legislative and presidential election articles would be the daughters. We do these in other countries with the same format (multiple elections held on the same day) such as United States elections, 2016 (United States presidential election, 2016, United States Senate elections, 2016, United States House of Representatives elections, 2016), Philippine general election, 2016 (Philippine presidential election, 2016, Philippine Senate election, 2016, Philippine House of Representatives elections, 2016). We also do this if the presidential and legislative elections are held on different days; the fact that both elections are done on the same day doesn't matter; they're still two separate elections, and if they were held on different days we would've split them. –H T D 14:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Re the claim "We do these in other countries with the same format", this isn't true - I gave numerous examples above of where we have a single article for the general election. This is what is done in the vast majority of cases. Number 5 7 15:34, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I just gave out two examples. Three, if you'd include Taiwan before it was merged into this ungodly mess. We do do it. –H T D 16:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, perhaps should have been clearer. It seemed that you were presenting the split article format as something that is always done for these kind of elections. The truth is that in most cases the articles are combined. I am yet to see a compelling reason why Taiwan needs be any different. Number 5 7 16:46, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

It's always been done for elections in Africa and elsewhere where you can't write anything substantial (no thanks to bias lol; not our fault) so you'd just lump them in one article. In this case we could have two articles (aside from the "mother" general election article) as we have candidate lists, polling and results from both elections. Having two infoboxes in this article is just downright weird, which shows that the article deserves to be split.

(On infoboxes, perhaps we do need a separate infobox for general election articles that tackle both legislative and presidential elections. Our current infoboxes are inadequate.) –H T D 17:09, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

As far as I am aware, the convention (certainly what I saw on the Brazilian article) is for there to only be one infobox, covering the presidential election. However, I have seen somewhere (I can't remember where) a combined infobox that used empty fields to add the parliamentary seats. Perhaps we could do this (see right for one way it could be done). Number 5 7 23:02, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

The problem with this is that it doesn't emphasize that there were 2 separate elections, and the example to the right doesn't transmit that idea to the reader. Plus the fact that presidential candidates, in theory, have nothing to do on what happens with the legislature on presidential systems modeled on the "separation of powers" model. We could have separate fields for pictures of legislature leaders and their districts but that would had made the already clunky infobox even clunkier. –H T D 16:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I have to disagree with the convention elsewhere that only one infobox be used on the Taiwanese election. As HTD said above, merging two infoboxes isn't easier/better in Wikipedia and offering only one did nothing to make the article easier. As "clumsy" as two infoboxes may feel like, I think this is the best way to summarise everything for the time being. Ideally, there should be three articles created (as they did in the Chinese Wikipedia side), with one "mother article" on the general election, and two on the presidential and parliamentary elections. There are enough materials on the Chinese side that can make this work, and I plan to translate them to English Wikipedia at some point. Until then, I would argue that the "status quo" (witty references to the Taiwanese election) is what we should keep on this article. --AsianHippie (talk) 10:16, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Why don't we follow the wikipedia guideline and hold a vote to settle the argument.Lmmnhn (talk) 17:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Because we don't vote on Wikipedia. See WP:NOTAVOTE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Number 57 (talk • contribs) 23:02, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Aboriginal electorats

What does Aboriginal electorats mean? How do they elect?--Kaiyr (talk) 11:32, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

@Kaiyr: There are six seats reserved for Taiwanese aborigines. They are elected in two three-seat constituencies (one for the highlands and one for the lowlands), with the three candidates receiving the most votes elected in each. I'm not sure about how voter eligibility is determined though. Number 5 7 17:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

separate legislative election and presidential election

Currently too much information, whether separate legislative election and presidential election Zenk0113 (talk) 08:45, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the issue is the presentation. Too many large tables – one thing we could do is shrink the size of the opinion poll tables and put the graphs (also too large) to the right hand side of them. Number 5 7 09:55, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Or like... split them? I don't like article that make me click "[show]" to show things that are hidden. It's not like we don't use it elsewhere, or this article didn't do that before..... –H T D 13:17, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't proposing that kind of shrinking. The tables are too wide, and could easily be narrowed to allow the graphs to be moved. Number 5 7 13:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

The tables look too wide because there's that huge infobox beside them. Plus I kinda like the big graphs; if you shrink them they'd be like colorful blobs that make no sense. (I have bad eyesight.) –H T D 13:47, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

The infobox would make them narrower (but longer if the text in the columns was longer than the remaining space). The overly-large width is caused by the coding in the table itself (they're set to be 100% of the page). See here for an example of what I meant (I only had to reduce the graph by 100px to get it to fit alongside the table, and I also use a fairly large screen resolution due to bad eyesight). Number 5 7 14:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Can't anyone just change them to 60%? There are only 3 choices + undecided. It's not as if there's plenty of columns to go by. I dunno if the infobox would make the impression that they're still set to "100%", but if you'd be planning to put the table and graph side-by-side the graph's width would be somewhere at the vicinity of 320px and I don't think that would be sufficient. –H T D 14:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

TBH, the infobox should be moved to the results section, not the opinion polls bit. Number 5 7 14:27, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

By definition, the infobox should always be on top. This is the problem if you're cramming two subjects in one article. –H T D 16:23, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Which is why this article should finally be split into two (or three)? Since the lack of content was the main issue for not splitting the article, there seems to be enough information (with more to come) to deserve an article for the presidential and another for legislative election. As I said above, there are much more information from Chinese Wikipedia that can be translated into the English article here, so I believe it shouldn't hurt anyone if we finally do the split now. --AsianHippie (talk) 06:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

But it isn't. We have combined articles for multiple other countries (and cope perfectly well with the infobox situation) – why is Taiwan so special that the article has to be split? If it becomes large enough that we have to, then fair enough, but in theory every article could become large enough to split, but we don't do it until it actually is. Currently we only have around two pages worth of text on the article. Number 5 7 08:27, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Taiwanese general election, 2020

Since this elections' over, it's about time for the 2020 article to be recreated... MB298 (talk) 03:04, 8 February 2016 (UTC)