Talk:Opinion polling for the 2021 German federal election
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
Update
[edit]Will the graph be updated by 2025? 42.111.6.50 (talk) 08:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- None of the pollsters (except for YouGov) polled over Christmas. Graph's basically determined by two data points, so I think it's pointless at this time. It'll be updated less than 2 weeks to this Tuesday; i.e., by by 15 January. Mélencron (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- At this point, there are 10 polls that have been published since the last update to the graph. Of these, there are four since New Year's. I'll probably update after the next time Forsa/INSA publish a new poll, which should be Monday. (If you're curious, the latest average I have is Union 32.3, SPD 20.0, AfD 13.3, FDP 9.2, Linke 9.8, Grüne 11.0. Without Civey/SPON-Wahltrend – for which daily figures aren't included in the polling table in the article – it's Union 32.7, SPD 20.2, AfD 13.0, FDP 9.2, Linke 9.7, Grüne 10.9.) Mélencron (talk) 05:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- Forsa and Emnid are all in so the only other "major" pollster that sometimes polls more than once a month would be the ZDF-Politbarometer (FGW). I'll update it shortly. Mélencron (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- At this point, there are 10 polls that have been published since the last update to the graph. Of these, there are four since New Year's. I'll probably update after the next time Forsa/INSA publish a new poll, which should be Monday. (If you're curious, the latest average I have is Union 32.3, SPD 20.0, AfD 13.3, FDP 9.2, Linke 9.8, Grüne 11.0. Without Civey/SPON-Wahltrend – for which daily figures aren't included in the polling table in the article – it's Union 32.7, SPD 20.2, AfD 13.0, FDP 9.2, Linke 9.7, Grüne 10.9.) Mélencron (talk) 05:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Now it's better. 42.111.74.213 (talk) 08:27, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
There should be a system of rolling updates of the graph with something akin to updates every fortnight or so, because the topic is currently an active one. (The possibility of a snap election is very real) 42.111.103.232 (talk) 07:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
why are there only 10 states? germany has 16 states. 134.245.191.51 (talk) 10:38, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Please update the Graphical summary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.108.28.86 (talk) 09:32, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
New civey poll
[edit]CDU/CSU 31.1, SPD 19.3, AfD 14.5, Greens 11.1, Left 9.9, FDP 9.3, Others 4.8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.22.147.46 (talk) 16:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC) Could someone add the most recent Forsa Berlin poll please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.74.26 (talk) 23:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Update
[edit]Coalition negotiations begin. 42.111.98.137 (talk) 09:37, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
- No, they haven't. Vote of SPD delegates hasn't happened yet; still another hour and a bit to go. Mélencron (talk) 13:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Good to have you back, something about the graph then? 157.39.40.237 (talk) 14:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
- It's been a couple weeks, might as well. Mélencron (talk) 14:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Adding Total mandates (PR+Direct mandates)
[edit]Shouldn't we add a table for total (PR List+Direct mandate) mandates? INSA also shows the data for that. I am working on this table, please let me know about your opinion. Mrvl2009 (talk) 09:17, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Reverting split of the constituency predictions
[edit]This split wasn't discussed on the talk page, so I'm reverting this for now. Constituency predictions are normally set together with the opinion polling elsewhere in wikipedia so to maintain consistency with other wikipedia article that should be the case here as well. Ergzay (talk) 15:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Ok. Given that the "poll results" section is now the longest section at ~332,000 bytes, it would make the most sense to split that section instead. Blubabluba9990 (talk) 18:06, October 16, 2021 (UTC)
- @Blubabluba9990 Please sign your comments when you post on talk pages. The size doesn't matter when looking at tables, what matters if it's more readable or not when split, which is not the case in this case. In this case much of the size comes from too many semi-repeated URLs. Ergzay (talk) 02:48, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Of course size matters. You've made a bold merger, and you reinstated it when you were reverted. Please follow WP:BRD (not BRRD) and self-revert your revert to the stable version. Onetwothreeip (talk) 03:22, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip I was following WP:BRD. I created a talk page before doing the bold revert, and then you reverted it with no comment. I'm glad you started discussing it, but you still haven't given a reason why you oppose it. (For the record I disagree with WP:BRD when it is reverting content back to how it was in the first place.) If discussion stops and no counterpoint has been given I'll continue with the merge. Ergzay (talk) 03:41, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- I believe I've told you already, but not on this article talk page. The article is extremely large and the big parts that relate to other than voting intention deserve their own articles. This has been an election which has attracted a very significant amount of opinion polling and projections, for all kinds of different questions. Onetwothreeip (talk) 04:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip Except it IS related to vote polling. One part of the two. You have the polling and you have the predictions based on the polling. Whenever you show polling data the second, if it exists, is always accompanied by the first. Do you think this is not the case? Ergzay (talk) 06:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- It always depends. In this case, the constituency stuff is large enough to warrant a separate article. Constituency predictions are very different to voting intention polling, especially for proportional representation elections. Onetwothreeip (talk) 06:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip "constituency stuff is large enough to warrant a separate article" no it isn't in terms of actual page space it's not large at all. And "Constituency predictions are very different to voting intention polling, especially for proportional representation elections." they're different things but they are DIRECTLY related to each other. Voting intention polling is then used to predict election results. Look at sites like fivethirtyeight.com for many examples of this where they have the polling followed by the predictions on the same page. It is normal to have both of these things together. Can you point to other articles where these are not combined? Ergzay (talk) 06:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's pretty common to have polling for individual constituencies in articles separate to the main article for the election's polling. The constituency projections aren't a projection of the election results, as most of the seats in the election are decided from proportional representation list votes. Onetwothreeip (talk) 02:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip What??? No it isn't at all. You always have polling combined with projections together. Stop making things up just as excuses to split the article. Ergzay (talk) 03:34, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's not a projection for the election results though. It's a projection of the constituency results. Most of the seats in the Bundestag are not constituency seats and the party totals are very different. Onetwothreeip (talk) 06:12, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip What??? No it isn't at all. You always have polling combined with projections together. Stop making things up just as excuses to split the article. Ergzay (talk) 03:34, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's pretty common to have polling for individual constituencies in articles separate to the main article for the election's polling. The constituency projections aren't a projection of the election results, as most of the seats in the election are decided from proportional representation list votes. Onetwothreeip (talk) 02:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip "constituency stuff is large enough to warrant a separate article" no it isn't in terms of actual page space it's not large at all. And "Constituency predictions are very different to voting intention polling, especially for proportional representation elections." they're different things but they are DIRECTLY related to each other. Voting intention polling is then used to predict election results. Look at sites like fivethirtyeight.com for many examples of this where they have the polling followed by the predictions on the same page. It is normal to have both of these things together. Can you point to other articles where these are not combined? Ergzay (talk) 06:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- It always depends. In this case, the constituency stuff is large enough to warrant a separate article. Constituency predictions are very different to voting intention polling, especially for proportional representation elections. Onetwothreeip (talk) 06:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip Except it IS related to vote polling. One part of the two. You have the polling and you have the predictions based on the polling. Whenever you show polling data the second, if it exists, is always accompanied by the first. Do you think this is not the case? Ergzay (talk) 06:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- I believe I've told you already, but not on this article talk page. The article is extremely large and the big parts that relate to other than voting intention deserve their own articles. This has been an election which has attracted a very significant amount of opinion polling and projections, for all kinds of different questions. Onetwothreeip (talk) 04:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Onetwothreeip I was following WP:BRD. I created a talk page before doing the bold revert, and then you reverted it with no comment. I'm glad you started discussing it, but you still haven't given a reason why you oppose it. (For the record I disagree with WP:BRD when it is reverting content back to how it was in the first place.) If discussion stops and no counterpoint has been given I'll continue with the merge. Ergzay (talk) 03:41, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Is anyone else interested in weighing in on this? @157.39.40.237 @Mrvl2009 @Mélencron @42.111.98.137 Ergzay (talk) 03:38, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Scenario polls
[edit]Didn't we use to show polls for a federal CSU? there was also a poll for Union led by Laschet & Söder what happened to them? Braganza (talk) 07:45, 22 July 2023 (UTC)