Talk:2019 Nigerian general election

Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2019

Delete the pictures of (and other references to) President Muhammadu Buhari and Atiku Abubakar and their running mates and parties in the "2019 Nigerian general elections" section/block, otherwise include similar references/entries for ALL other candidates in the election. This is the only equitable and reasonable option, IF the section/block must be included.

Reduce the Security Level of the page for CONFIRMED contributors to edit the section/block in question, IF making the change would be too tasking for the current editors. Okebedo (talk) 10:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not practical to add all other contestants in that box. The ones presently in the box are the leading candidates and their parties and stories carry more weight than all the remaining contestants combined. Wikipedia does not create false balance. If you want the protection level to be lowered, make a request at Wikipedia:RFP. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:03, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Second round?

"The President of Nigeria is elected using a simple majority of votes cast, as well as over 25% of the votes in 27 of the 36 states". So, what happen if no candidate reach these conditions? Is there a second round? --Aréat (talk) 04:10, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

@Aréat: Yes, there is. I've added it to the article based on this. Cheers, Number 57 12:32, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. It's seemed very logical, but the page on the nigerian president didn't say it clearly with sources. --Aréat (talk) 13:03, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Number of Senate members

The number should be 109 and not 110 as seen on the article. AzuAgu (talk) 14:46, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@AzuAgu: thank you, it has been corrected. Mahveotm (talk) 19:46, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Creating Presidential and Parliamentary separate articles for 2019 elections

Am of the opinion that a separate article should be created for the 2019 Nigeria Presidential election just like you have 2016 United States presidential election separated from 2016 United States elections that still exists. Also is to have a 2019 Nigerian parliamentary election that reflect both the Senate and House of Representatives just like you have 2016 United States Senate elections and the likes. I feel this will reflect more detailed content about the general election and also have to talk about the gubernatorial elections in 2019 election on 2019 Nigerian general election. Let me know your thought about this. Kaizenify (talk) 12:43, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

It's not necessary. The US articles are split because they are huge. In other cases where there is not much material (as the case is here), we keep single articles (see e.g. 2018 Zimbabwean general election, 2018 Sierra Leonean general election, 2018 Democratic Republic of the Congo general election, 2017 Kenyan general election, 2017 Liberian general election etc). Number 57 12:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Alright, thank Number 57 and also for your great contributions on the 2019 Nigeria election timeline. Kaizenify (talk) 14:03, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Presidential candidaes

There were other presidential aspirants in the ruling APC, notably, Dr SKC Ogbonnia, Chief Charles Udeogaranya and Alhaji Mumakai Unagha, but the party eventually adopted President Buhari as a sole candidate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:38D0:E5C0:1599:681F:74FC:1FC6 (talk) 05:54, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

0.0 percent of the vote

Currently, the page indicates that candidates receiving votes have 0.0 percent of the vote; logically this does not make sense and would appear incorrect. I changed this to "<0.1" which would appear correct, and have been reverted twice. Are there any valid reasons to have 0.0 instead of <0.1? Because it does not make sense in my view. @Number 57: ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:22, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

One can understand "0.0" to mean "0.0 to the nearest 0.1". Some would say that's why you write "0.0" rather than "0": because "0" means zero, but "0.0" means zero to the nearest 0.1. That said, generally I would favour "< 0.1" in these circumstances. Bondegezou (talk) 14:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

It only doesn't make sense if you don't understand the concept of rounding. It's standard practice to write 0.0 or 0.00 when that's what the rounded figure is; see, for example 2016_Spanish_general_election#Results or 2017_United_Kingdom_general_election#Full_results. Having a < in the table is completely unnecessary nor acceptable IMO. Number 57 15:39, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

But lots of readers don't understand rounding! I don't feel strongly on this matter, but I note that policy is we should write for a broad audience, and it seems to me that means not presuming the reader will understand such conventions. Bondegezou (talk) 16:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I really doubt that. Rounding is a basic concept that pretty much anyone who has completed high school will understand. Number 57 16:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

How is it unacceptable? Your argument is "rounding" but given no argument for why <0.1 or <.1 is a less attractive option. And I don't frankly see how rounding 1.99 to 2 is the same as rounding 0.001 to 0. Sure, they're performing essentially the same function, but you're still saying something is basically 0 when it is quite obviously a number higher than 0. I'm not sure rounding down to zero is something that makes sense in the field of election statistics. Also, implying that I don't have a high school education just makes you look like a jerk, and it doesn't say anything about me. Sorry for attempting to discuss this issue instead of just accepting your silent reverts. Also, 'this is what we do in other articles' is not a good argument when I am addressing why the practice itself is valid. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 17:00, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

It's unacceptable because it's completely pointless and unnecessary. And I wasn't implying that you don't have a high school education; my point was (in response to the broad audience statement) that rounding is a basic concept that anyone who has completed school should be able to understand, and therefore is appropriate for a broad audience.

"This is what we do in other articles" is a perfectly good argument, as it shows what normal practice is. If this was deemed to be a problem, then we wouldn't have be doing it, as presumably someone would have noticed it was an issue by now (over 15 years into Wikipedia's existence). Number 57 17:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm not going to die on this hill, but I don't think 'no one else changed it' is a good argument for keeping something. But, alas, I can't articulate it any more than I already have, which was probably not very well (it's like pornography, I just know it when I see it). Honestly I just thought I was making a non-controversial change when I first did it. I guess we can see if anyone else chimes in aside from Bondegezou, though it seems doubtful on a page with this little traffic. Cheers and well wishes to all, including the Nigerian state. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 14:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Image

Hi all, although I've edited on the mainspace for a long time, I am relativly new to uploading items on commons. I tried to upload File:Nigeria presidential election 2019 - blue and green.jpg on commons and add it to the article as I thought the article would improve with a map of the elction results. However I did not anticipate the green to look as bright as it currently does, it did not seem to apear that way in the EZ paint editor that I used. If anyone has any objections or concerns please feel free to remove the image and/or post here. Thanks Inter&anthro (talk) 20:25, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Inter&anthro: Thanks for your upload. I believe the green is way too bright. If you can get it to look like this, it would be great. Since you have released the image into the public domain, others might be able to replace the green portion of the map. @Jamie Tubers: can you please take a look at this file and tell me if you're able to replace the bright green with a different variation of green? I'd appreciate a response, thanks.  Versace1608  ^{Wanna Talk?} 02:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Versace1608: Hi I've changed the tint of green. Hopefully it seems better, yet again in the final product the shape of green is much brighter than what appeared on the image while I was editing it. Hope it helps though. Inter&anthro (talk) 04:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks to Versace1608 for tagging me. I think the colour looks okay now. I think my concern about the image would be more about the quality. It looks blurry and pixelated. A good quality .svg version would've been perfect. Or is everyone fine with the current quality?--Jamie Tubers (talk) 17:51, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Majority vs Plurality for Presidential Election

I've seen multiple conflicting sources for whether a majority is a requirement for the first round of the Nigerian presidential election. In the Constitution of Nigeria, in section 134(2), it states that "A candidate for an election to the office of President shall be deemed to have been duly elected where, there being more than two candidates for the election-- (a) has the highest number of votes cast at the election". This seems to imply that even a candidate that doesn't receive more than 50% of the vote but receives the most votes and meets the other requirements would be elected president. I therefore don't understand why other sources state a a majority is needed for the presidential election-- any clarification would be appreciated.

Constitution: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Nigeria_2011.pdf?lang=en, page 60.

Pimonster (talk) 13:50, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Senate results

The Senate results add up to 110 seats, when only 109 are available. @Don'tDropThatTotoro: The seat figures were changed by you. Any idea what went wrong? Number 57 20:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)