Talk:Representative direct democracy

Neologism?

Is this article title – representative direct democracy – a neologism? Is it reported in any reliable sources? Is this article an unnecessary fork of proxy voting?

A quick Google search for the phrase representative direct democracy reveals 46 pages that aren't Wikipedia mirrors. Many of those pages, in turn, were false positive hits, for sentence fragments like "...remain only weakly representative. Direct democracy must...". The few hits I do see that are close to being on point for this topic seem to be forum posts on Yahoo Answers and its ilk ([1]). Even there, that answer merely talks about a supermajority of citizens being able to override their elected representative's choice — not the proxy-type system that this article's writers seem to believe the term describes.

I will nominate this article for merger or deletion if reliable sources are not found to demonstrate that this is both a notable concept and a legitimate term of art. (I also wonder if it shouldn't be deleted or merged on sight, as it appears to be essentially a duplicate of the previously-merged content from liquid democracy and delegable proxy.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the difficulty is that it's an idea that dozens of people seem to have come up with independently, with a different name each time. James C. Miller III's A Program for Direct and Proxy Voting in the Legislative Process is, perhaps, the most notable exposition of it. Lighting Thundercat (talk) 00:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having read the Miller paper ([2]), I see that the term representative direct democracy isn't used anywhere, leaving us back where we started. The described process, meanwhile, remains simple variant of the delegated proxy wherein by default one's elected representative (Congressperson or Senator) acts as one's proxy.

Do you have any sources that would support either the article's current name, or the need for this concept to have its own article? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:49, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is terminology really all that important? The article is not about a term; it's about a system. As for whether it deserves its own article, that's hard to say. We have many articles about the same length, that are unlikely to get any longer. It would seem to be a matter of preference. The term used is also a matter of preference, because it has never really been standardized. You may as well write "liquid democracy," "direct democracy with delegable proxy," "delegated voting," and "representative direct democracy" on the sides of a 4-sided die and roll it. Or perhaps leave out the last one, and roll a 3-sided die instead. Lightning Thundercat (talk) 01:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMMONNAME says that we should be using the most common name, not a randomly selected one. In this case, liquid democracy is a much more common term. --Explodicle (T/C) 18:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is a difference between delegated voting and liquid democracy. Delegated voting can be used by groups with no governmental authority, but liquid democracy usually refers to governmental applications. After reviewing this and the proxy voting article, I think we might be best off doing the following:

Split off the delegated voting section of proxy voting into its own delegated voting article, with a subsection for liquid democracy.
Redirect this article to the liquid democracy subsection, merging anything of value. Miller's variant might be worth a sentence, but not a whole article.

--Explodicle (T/C) 18:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if this isn't just a duplicate of the already-deleted delegable proxy. Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delegable proxy, it looks a lot like this article should probably be merged quietly back to Proxy voting#Delegated voting. That article section is already both longer and better-sourced that this article. At the same time, it seems to cover the topic in quite adequate detail. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:NEO#Articles_wrongly_titled_as_neologisms

Any thoughts on how we might apply the guidance provided at Wikipedia:NEO#Articles_wrongly_titled_as_neologisms? I'm not sure of what a better article title might be. Lightning Thundercat (talk) 18:17, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of the restructuring idea I just posted above? --Explodicle (T/C) 18:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per my notes in the above section, this should probably just be merged to Proxy voting#Delegated voting. All the other roughly synonymous terms (liquid democracy, delegable proxy, etc.) already are redirected there. The last time we asked the community about this, there was a consensus that this topic didn't need its own article. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delegable proxy and the discussion above, it appears that this article is redundant with Proxy voting#Delegated voting. I've placed the appropriate merge tag. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:05, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the merge proposal. --Explodicle (T/C) 11:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]