Talk:2004 United States presidential election in Ohio

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

United States: Presidential elections / Ohio / Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Low-importance).
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Merge "controversies" article

It seems as if the content of both of these articles should be in one place, preferably here, since this seems to be the "main" article discussing the 2004 Election in Ohio. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think perhaps the article should instead/also be merged 'back' to the main irregularities article, 2004_U.S._presidential_election_controversy_and_irregularities. Thoughts? -- User:RyanFreisling @ 13:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me. However, I think this article should at least have a subheading with a few paragraphs devoted to the controversy along with a link to the main article. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I originally created this and the florida article back when we had only one gi-normous article. My intent was to find a way to split up the content. into subarticles. now we have the machines-suppression-polls-legal actions break down which seems to work pretty well. I was actually hoping these articles would be deleted in the vfds, but i think merge is actually more ideal. this article predominately deals with vote suppression. it's actully very similiar to that article. i suggest merging this and florida into 2004 United States presidential election controversy, vote suppression. I'm fine with the idea of a subheading and a few paragraphs, with a link. Kevin Baas^talk 17:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, This article is part of the serie "United States presidential election, by state". Almost all other states have their own article, and it would be a non sens to merge this one into an other one. I don't believe it would be a good idea either to merge 2004 United States election voting controversies, Ohio into this article. Instead, i think we sould have a new have a subheading in this article with a few paragraphs devoted to the controversy along with a link to the main 2004 United States election voting controversies, Ohio. --Revas 18:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To make sure there's no confusion: I suggested merging 2004 United States election voting controversies, Florida and 2004 United States election voting controversies, Ohio into 2004 United States presidential election controversy, vote suppression. In any case, we all seem to agree that there should be a subheading and a few short paragraphs on this page, w/an appropriate link. Kevin Baas^talk 18:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, one could do the reverse and split/merge 2004 United States presidential election controversy, vote suppression into 2004 United States election voting controversies, Florida and 2004 United States election voting controversies, Ohio. I never liked the redundancy. Kevin Baas^talk 18:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, i misunderstood, sorry, my English sucks...--Revas 18:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's my fault, and it's my bad english. I didn't suggest - i meant to suggest. I thought this was the talk page for the irregularities article when i wrote that. Let's start on a draft for the section and link in this article. Kevin Baas^talk 18:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Draft controversy section

During the 2004 U.S. presidential election, there were many problems with the election process in Ohio, including missing and uncounted votes; machine malfunctions; machine shortages; machine mis-voting; and anomalous statistical discrepancies in vote tabulations, such as more votes than voters. Statistical analysis of the demographic distribution of these problems and how strongly, in the aggregate, they favored one candidate over another, have led some critics, authors, statisticians, politicians, and concerned citizens to suspect coordinated election fraud throughout the state.

File:Flag of Dayton, Ohio.gif Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Flag of Dayton, Ohio.gif, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Seal of Ohio.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Seal of Ohio.svg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]