Talk:LXVI Legislature of the Mexican Congress

Mexico Low‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico 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.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Linking the districts

I'm thinking of undertaking the massive task of linking the electoral districts. What'd be the best way? I'm leaning towards including leading zeroes (they'll align nicely -- CDMX, Veracruz, etc. -- with a bigger area to click on). Without the closing dots (colon maybe?). The ordinals are ugly. And not linking those that don't exist (sea of red, particularly with so much Morena, and the {{ill}}s just look bad).

▌1. Alma Laura Ruiz López (MORENA)

▌02. Nancy Guadalupe Sánchez Arredondo (MORENA)

▌03: Claudia Moreno Ramírez (MORENA)

▌04 Rocío López Gorosave (MORENA)

▌5th Evangelina Moreno Guerra [es] (MORENA)

▌06: [es] Gilberto Herrera Solórzano (MORENA)

▌7th [es] Armando Fernández Samaniego (MORENA)

▌08: Fausto Gallardo García [es] (PVEM)

▌09 Araceli Brown Figueredo (MORENA)

Ideas? Moscow Mule (talk) 16:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like 2 or 3 (preferably 2).

For names that do not exist, yes, I'd say we should remove them, but I don't know if we should remove the {{ill}}s.

Follow-up: I've been imitating the U.S. Congress articles for party changes, and I have been handling them by adding another party stripe and an efn note, but following your logic, it wouldn't line up with the district numbers. How would we handle party changes (or will we just keep the note without party stripe)? Example below:

▌▌1. Manuel Cota Cárdenas (PVEM) [efn note describing party change here] EchoLuminary (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, No. 2, per Nancy above: leading zero and closing dot. I can live with that. Using that format and the ILLs, we'd get:

▌02. Nancy Guadalupe Sánchez Arredondo (MORENA)

▌06. [es] Gilberto Herrera Solórzano (MORENA)

I still think the ILLs look bad. Does moving the period help?

▌06 [es]. Gilberto Herrera Solórzano (MORENA)

Marginally (?). Remember there are entire states (EdoMex, NL...) without any district articles created. And most states are lucky to have one or two deputies with articles: sea of red. I like the doubled stripes (and they visually impart useful information, without scrolling down to / rolling over the efn). But yeah, column aligment is nice too. Maybe change the order?

Zacatecas

01. ▌ Soledad Luévano Cantú (MORENA)

02. ▌▌ Julia Olguín Serna (MORENA)^[a]

03. ▌ Ulises Mejía Haro (MORENA)

04. ▌ Ana Luisa del Muro García (PT)

I think that looks good. But including the ILLs really upsets the layout there:

03. [es] ▌ Ulises Mejía Haro (MORENA)

Try and talk me into including the ILLs [edit: for the districts] (I'm heavily leaning no), or suggest another format? (Mind you, most states -- BC is the only exception -- are either all district articles created or no articles created, so that staggering of the columns within individual states' listings will be rare.) Oh, and per "Zacatecas" above, de-link the states? Moscow Mule (talk) 19:10, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stripes after the name keeps the names aligned, but looks bad & doesn't split the sea of red. Forget that. Moscow Mule (talk) 19:18, 5 September 2024 (UTC) ::::Zacatecas[reply]

01. Soledad Luévano Cantú ▌ (MORENA)

02. Julia Olguín Serna ▌▌ (MORENA)^[a]

03. Ulises Mejía Haro ▌ (MORENA)

04. Ana Luisa del Muro García ▌ (PT)

Actually, now that I see it laid out, you are completely right with the ILLs. ILLs on districts look horrible. While I'd like to defend using ILLs on deputy names, having red appear for some names and not for others looks off. But having red on all names is just the same ol' sea of red.

Example (looks off):

01. ▌ Soledad Luévano Cantú [es] (MORENA)

02. ▌▌ Julia Olguín Serna (MORENA)

03. ▌ Ulises Mejía Haro (MORENA)

04. ▌ Ana Luisa del Muro García (PT)

So yeah, no ILL. EchoLuminary (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, yes, de-link the states. Linking to the state's wiki page is not useful information... in an ideal world I would link the state name to a wiki page on a list of the state's senators/deputies but those pages do not exist. EchoLuminary (talk) 20:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This would be: district (with leading 0; but with the stripe following, I feel the period after isn't necessary -- the eye flows naturally), stripe(s), name. All names redlinked or ILLed (sea of red, but WP:WIP -- we live in hope); districts linked but not ILLed.

Statename

01 ▌▌ Hypothetical Defection (PRI)^[a]

02 ▌ Deputy with w:es article [es] (PAN)

03 ▌ Deputy with article (PAN)

04. ▌ No district/deputy article, Dot after (cluttered?) (PAN)

Any objections/tweaks to that? (And yes, congressional delegation articles... some day. But a bit useless with so many red links.) Moscow Mule (talk) 21:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All good EchoLuminary (talk) 22:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CDMX

In the Senate listings, CDMX comes between Chih. and Coah.; in the CoD list, it's between Edomex and Mich. Either could be argued (I lean in the Senate's direction) but consistency makes sense. Moscow Mule (talk) 01:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Senate direction (as that's usually the official order), I actually forgot to move it at some point. EchoLuminary (talk) 02:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]