Talk:2022 Castilian-Leonese regional election

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spain Low‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vía Burgalesa

@Impru20: i dont know if we should seperate them, since they are list as part of EV but they are called Vía Burgalesa (you can see it if you have the mouse on the name) [1] Braganza (talk) 21:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Braganza: Sorry for the delay, I have had a busy weekend! No, they should not be shown separately since in the overall totals they are included with the rest of EV. Only SY is shown separately in the global results. Impru20^talk 10:46, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning election polls

I do not completely understand the reason why some polls are highlighted in a different colour in the opinion polling table. The description says that these are polls "conducted after legal ban on opinion polls", which is a sentence that may be interpreted as if there was a "ban" on "conducting" polls, which there is not. The "ban" is on "publishing" polls.

Therefore, I propose, if a difference has to be made between different kinds of polls, to separate them by "publishing" date (which all of them have) and not by "conducting" date (which not all of them have, and then the publishing date is used). In this case, there would be the "usual" polls, the polls that are "published" the last days of campagne (theoretically banned), and the polls that are published right after the polling stations closed (technically published after the ban day, but not banned, and which may be conducted during the last days of campagne). Togiad (talk) 16:03, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I happened to think the same quite a few years ago, then I crashed into the reality of practical usage.

"Conducted" is used as opposed to "published" because, in the past, there have been many situations of polls published after the legal ban that were, nonetheless, conducted before other polls that were published before the ban. This allowed for situations in which you would have red-shadowed rows intercalated with no-shadowed rows, precisely because of this difference between publication and fieldwork, which was even weirder and a major break in table consistency than the situation you describe (which is, actually, a very minimal disruption in consistency).

Note that polls are sorted in the table by fieldwork dates, not publication date. The latter only applies when the former are not available, but at this stage of campaigning (i.e. the last week ahead of election), almost no poll is published in which the fieldwork date is not shown/cannot be determined. Impru20^talk 16:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point. Still, I don't see where the consistency is broken if there are intercaleted coloured rows as long as the information the colour provides is correct. Anyway, in elections with exit polls, there's even another colour to indicate them.

Then, my concern is that if "conducted" is used, the colours have no use, as there is no problem if a poll is "conducted" after the ban as it is no different than any other. What can make a poll different is if it is "published" after the ban, because it is a publishing ban. This is why I also think that the current colour desciption can be misleading. Togiad (talk) 18:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are seeing a problem that does not exist, really.

The information currently provided by the colour is correct. Colouring does not mean any "problem" exists. It is just mean to highlight that a given poll was conducted during the election silence period, no more, no less; otherwise, it would be akin to us attempting to provide an accurate listing of polls that are in break of election law, and we aren't doing that, right? Also note that the way some of these polls are published during this period is not the way the election law understand "publication".

I think you are falling under a too legalistic view here which is a separate debate to opinion poll listing. Having intercalated coloured rows is confusing and does indeed break consistency (i.e. give me any example of any other country having silence periods in which polls are intercalated in their respective articles. You will find none). Impru20^talk 19:13, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actual results in graph

Hello, I guess the actual results of the election should be added to the graph in the opinion polls section. Thanks. Togiad (talk) 20:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Unión del Pueblo Leonés.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]