Jump to content

Talk:Electoral reform in New Zealand

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Needing to be added

[edit]

Please, if you think something needs to be added, but don't know it yourself, put it here.

  1. Local government needs to be expanded substantially
  2. More on how it developed through the 1987 and 1990 election campaigns.
  3. Effects on elections in New Zealand
  4. Development of/changes to the party system under MMP
  5. results of referendum in full
  6. pictures of ballot papers (in order to one day, maybe, get featured article on Portal:Politics

--LeftyG 07:42, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article should cover the influence MMP has had on NZ. Will work on it sometime soon.--Midnighttonight please tell me off for procrastinating on my essay! 22:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There have been a lot of articles covering MMP and the change in the Herald recently for obvious reaons. Some of them should be useful. For example, I believe Social Credit won 21% of the vote but only 2 seats in 1981 (we only mentioned Labour-National dispropriatinality) Nil Einne 18:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone studying NZ Issues, including me, should be Ashamed:

[edit]

Why has NOONE mentioned the planned Bill for this year to reform election spending, etc?

That's your department. Please add a section to the most appropriate article. That may be New Zealand elections or Electoral system of New Zealand rather than this article. Add a cross reference from 2005_New_Zealand_election_funding_controversy#Overhaul_of_election_funding_laws.-gadfium 19:48, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category

[edit]

Could someone who knows how make Category:Referendums in New Zealand a subcategory of "Referendums by Country" please as NZ is one of the few countries missing Hugo999 (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It's just a matter of editing the category page.-gadfium 05:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mmp-poster.jpg

[edit]

Image:Mmp-poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To Review

[edit]

Given the recent election, this sentence should probably reviewed: "The number of political parties was expected to fall[citation needed] (as happened in Germany after their adoption of MMP), but has in fact increased." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.128.197 (talk) 12:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1992 Referendum results

[edit]

I'm not sure if the vote numbers themselves are wrong, but the percentages certainly are - for the second part of the 1992 referendum. The real results can be found on the EC website (http://www.elections.org.nz/elections/referendum/referendums.html) and show: SM - 5.6% STV - 17.4% MMP - 70.5% PV - 6.6%

I have no wikipedia editing knowledge but just thought I should make this known! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.252.24.130 (talk) 16:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That website is rounding to one decimal place, and we are rounding to two decimal places. Other than that, we seem to be giving the same figures in the "valid" column. We also present a second set of figures in the "total" column which take into account the 96000-odd invalid or blank votes.-gadfium 22:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Combining electoral system article with electoral reform article

[edit]

This article on electoral reform in New Zealand could be combined with the electoral system of New Zealand. There is no need for separate articles about what is basically the same topic.Offender9000 21:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Electoral reform in New Zealand. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:56, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Electoral reform in New Zealand. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good source

[edit]

Here's a good source for article expansion. The author has studied the 70 electoral reforms that happened between 1970 and 2020. Schwede66 00:27, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Split of referendum sections

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Electoral_reform_in_New_Zealand&oldid=1196677329"