Template talk:Canadian party colour/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Independent party members

Before this template, we let Independent-Liberals and Independent-Conservatives use the colour of their party, like in the table at the top of 40th Parliament of Canada. Now, if someone used the row-name feature with an independent-party member they will get the text that they want, but the independent colour. We might want to keep the template like this given that the MPs aren't really part of the caucus, but if we want to continue to allow independents to use colours, well have to give /name an override option, so you could do something like {{Canadian party colour |NDP |row-name |display=Independent NDP}}. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 02:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

They should be kept the independent colour, like Alberta. If an editor would like to override the row-name function they can with the Lorem Ipsum example in the documentation. 117Avenue (talk) 02:49, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I like keeping the independents gray too. On a completely unrelated matter, I think we can just assign white to "vacant" because only eight pages are using the old template's "vacant" option, and all of those one should be using the "other" option. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:36, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Is there going to be any use for black? 117Avenue (talk) 11:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

If vacant is white and error is independent, then I don't think we need it. Not even the Pirate Party uses black. Black also makes text on top of it invisible unless we use white text, which I would avoid doing if possible because I think that often looks tacky and it doesn't appear right on some displays. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 19:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Choice of colours

Is there a reason you're using three different shades of red for the three liberal parties so far? The Ontario party uses the general shade of red in all three old templates, yet you gave it a brand new one. The federal party uses the general shade of red in two out of three of the old templates, but you gave it the third one. I think that we should use the same shade for every jurisdiction's version of a party unless there is a very strong reason to make an exception. If you're using different shades of red because the parties are not officially affiliated, I don't think that using 10 slightly different shades is a good way ot show that; it just makes us look inconsistent. As long as the parties have the same name and were related to eachother at their founding, I think that's enough affiliation to let them use the same colour. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 06:29, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

You're right in assuming it is because they are not affiliated. The intention of this template was to put all the meta/color templates in one place, and the political editors in a number of the jurisdictions have chosen to sync the Liberal colour with the one used on the logo, or the website. I don't think LightCoral and #9999FF should have been chosen as the colours for Liberal and PC, as these don't appear close to what is used by the parties or the media, to me. 117Avenue (talk) 11:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with the change for a number of reasons.

1. If we are basing colours on what editors in the jurisdictions have been doing so far, then I should point out that Ontario uses the general colour on 132 pages of Template:Ontario elections/Liberals, plus another 30 or so on the /ministry_box templates before I rewrote them, whereas the darker colour was only used on the 11 pages of Template:Liberal Party of Ontario/meta/color.
2. I don't think that we need to use colour to distinguish between provincial parties that aren't affiliated with the federal party and those that are. Within a jurisdiction it is necisary to do so, like between the historic Conservatives and the new Conservatives. However, people will rarely see the Ontario Liberal colour and the federal Liberal colour on the same page, so they probably won't even notice the colour difference, and instead will be left with a general impression that the encyclopedia is inconsistent. If two parties are completely unrelated and their name is just a coincidence, then they should use different colours, like with the Progessive Party and the Progressive Canadians. However, the federal and Ontario Liberals have parallel founding narratives, so they are related and their names are not just a coincidence. As long as the articles themselves explain the relationship between the two levels of the party, I don't think that we need to use twelve different shades of red across the articles.
3. There are a few reasons why using the same shade as the party logo is a problem. (1) The logo colours are usually much darker than lightcoral, so when text is placed on top of them, like on the navigation box at the bottom of Dalton McGuinty, it becomes difficult to read on many monitors, and impossible to read on low-quality monitors, creating a huge WP:USE issue. (2) Parties change the shade of their logos every couple decades, so using the logo colour is only more accurate for articles about the last few elections. (3) Lightcoral has a bit of a pastel quality that matches Wikipedia's overall look, and the purpose of these colours is to be a quick visual reference in lists and to give some colour to an otherwise black-and-white page, not to represent the actual colour—that's what the images at the top of the pages are for. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 18:40, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not too convinced that the jurisdictions should be different, so you've got me there. But I think we need to chose a colour that best represents all the parties, the pastels are just too far off for me, especially for the Ontario Liberals. As I have the time, I will be expanding the list to all provinces, and then we'll have a centralized place to compare. 117Avenue (talk) 22:52, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not tied to the pastels if other colours better represent the parties, although I'd avoid colours that are very bright, like X11's red, unless bright colours were a defining characteristic of a party. For parties that have formed government, I'd also avoid ones that are too dark to see text over, because people like using the colour for the background of ministry navigational boxes. I kind of like #DC241F, which you are using for the federal party, but I think it might be a bit too dark to put text over it, so maybe we could use a lighter version of it, like #E54A47. I've made a table for comparisons. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 19:23, 22 December 2011‎ (UTC)

This is #E32636, now used on some navigation templates.	Colours now in use.
This is #E51A38, now used on the /meta templates.
This is #F08080 a.k.a. lightcoral, now used for Liberal in many places.
This is #A32638, now used for ON Liberal on this template.
This is #DC241F, now used for CA Liberal on this template.
This is #E33935, which is #DC241F with lightness increased from 126 to 140.	shades of #DC241F
This is #E4423E, which is #DC241F with lightness increased from 126 to 145.
This is #E54A47, which is #DC241F with lightness increased from 126 to 150.
This is #E7534F, which is #DC241F with lightness increased from 126 to 155.
This is #E85B58, which is #DC241F with lightness increased from 126 to 160.
This is #E96461, which is #DC241F with lightness increased from 126 to 165.
This is #EA6D6A, which is #DC241F with lightness increased from 170, the same as the Conservative and NDP colours.
This is #FA8072 a.k.a. salmon.	Other ideas
This is #FF6347 a.k.a. tomato.
This is #FF0000 a.k.a. red, which is used on the flag.
This is #FF5555, which is red with lightness increased to 170.

Non-contenders

Do parties that never contested an election or by-election need to be added to this consolidation? For example, the Wildrose Party of Alberta only existed for a year. While I do think that, because of the length of the article, the party was at one point registered with Elections Alberta, the article still lacks a reference saying so. The "Wildrose (historical)" parameter can only be used in one place, the infobox on the subject article, which is currently doing fine without a colour template. 117Avenue (talk) 06:17, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

If it never contested an election or held a seat, there is no need for it to be in this template. I already excluded the Alberta Veterans' Party because it would only be used in a couple articles, but I didn't do my research when it came to the history of the Wildrose. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 21:23, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

NDP

When adding the NDPs to the name subpage I have been using the short form "New Democrat", because my thought was that we are describing the person, ("Conservative", "Liberal", "Green"). But for the complex party names, I have just been removing "party" and the jurisdiction, which would make the NDPs "New Democratic". I think I have changed my opinion, and now want to use "New Democratic". 117Avenue (talk) 01:00, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

That would match the format that we've been using for other parties' names. However, we could alternatively add a rule that in addition to removing the word "party" and the jurisdiction, we also change all adjectives modifying the word "party" into nouns, like we did with "New Democrat". —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 07:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

That would take us down into interpretation, which shouldn't be done. What would be affected? Abolitionist → Abolitionism, Communist → Communism, Marxist–Leninist → Marx–Lenin, Socialist → Socialism? 117Avenue (talk) 04:30, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Independent-affiliated

Some of the old templates put a narrow coloured border around Independent-Liberals and Independent-Conservatives so that the cell is mostly grey with a hint of the person's chosen affiliation. Do you think that something like that would be useful here? It would require some testing, but I think it would be possible from a technical standpoint. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 23:24, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I thought we already discussed this above, and decided to keep it grey. 117Avenue (talk) 02:09, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't notice the border option. It's an interesting compromise, but I agree that it's not all that necessary. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 09:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea, but you've been a busy guy. Can you link an oldid from where it was used? 117Avenue (talk) 04:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

QC Conservative

Where should the tag "QC Conservative" link? The page Conservative Party of Quebec is a dab page, which to me suggests that QC Conservative should be unlikned without further disambiguation into QC Conservative (historical), QC PC, and QC Conservative (2009). —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 21:54, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't see the conversation before reverting P.T. Aufrette. This party isn't like the other dabs, because it has no primary topic, it is a disambig page. If "QC Conservative" isn't being used, I'd be alright with unlinking it, but leaving the colour. 117Avenue (talk) 04:57, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the modern Conservative Party of Quebec, here is its 2010 financial statement: its annual budget was on the order of one thousand dollars, give or take. Go to the Elections Quebec "Research on contributors" page, select "Parti conservateur du Québec" from the "Political party" list and click on the "Search" button: a grand total of $405 in contributions, for "all years".

I don't want to sound obsessive, but maybe folks from other parts of Canada see the name "Conservative" and think of the federal party or their powerful local provincial parties (with which the Quebec party has no known affiliation), and attach a little too much notability to the modern Quebec party. Maybe it's just my POV, but this seems like a fringe party that just happened to recycle an old name. I am already hatching a plot to propose moving Conservative Party of Quebec (historical) back to the undisambiguated page and relegate the modern party to a hatnote, but am waiting for results of the next Quebec election (this year or next) to make the case stronger. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 23:39, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, I may have spoken too soon. The 2009 to 2011 version was moribund, but the 2012 version seems somewhat more active under new management. It seems they will actually field candidates in the next election after all, disgruntled ex-adéquiste rookie former MNAs (briefly) who didn't go along with the recent CAQ merger. I suspect they will have about as much electoral success as the Progressive Canadian party has had (another group of merger holdouts), ie, even low single digit percentages would be a stretch, but it's a different picture than the party that existed only on paper earlier. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 03:39, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand that the Conservative party is minor party in Quebec, but I think we should err on the side of unlinked names rather than incorrect links. If the new party fizzles out before the next election, we should make the historical party the default, but if they run in some ridings we should require disambiguation to get a link. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 19:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't disagree that the modern party is only a minor party. I guess all I can say is that it was an oversight of mine to model the parameters after the federal Conservative parties, and not match the article titles. The primary topic here, should match the primary topics in the article space. 117Avenue (talk) 03:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Quebec abbreviations: a parallel naming scheme?

There are two primary sources for data on Quebec elections:

• general elections and by-elections from the Elections Quebec website (aka Directeur général des élections du Québec), which only has data since 1973, however.
• elections since 1867 from the National Assembly website, with data from 1867, but only simple vote tallies.

The Elections Quebec pages only show party names as acronyms, (eg, see here for Champlain in 2003). For instance the Quebec Liberal Party is "(P.L.Q./Q.L.P.)". This can be tricky when there is an obscure party like "P.D.C.Q." I've been unable to locate a glossary page on the site where a person unfamiliar with the history of Quebec politics can look these up.

However, perhaps we can make a virtue of necessity. If we create a parallel scheme, where "QC (P.L.Q./Q.L.P.)" (or some such) exists in parallel with "QC Liberal", then you could just mechanically cut and paste and build a Canadian election result table from the corresponding Elections Quebec page without pausing to remember who's who and what's what, or remembering exactly how we disambiguated "Quebec Conservative". — Preceding unsigned comment added by P.T. Aufrette (talk • contribs) 00:20, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The #switch function easily allows multiple tags to point to the same colour and link, so I have no problem with making "QC Liberal" and "QC P.L.Q." point to the same place if that would make editing easier. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 19:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we need to adapt our templates to use other's abbreviations. I think it is easy to use our own, and we can make some consistency across the provinces. It shouldn't be NPD in one province, but NDP in another, etc. When looking to abbreviate a party's name in English or French, we should look at what the article is titled, like the primary topic issue above. 117Avenue (talk) 03:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Avoiding conflicts between different provinces

To avoid the problem of different provincial naming schemes conflicting with one another (eg, two "UN" parties), would it be feasible to have separate "Quebec election result", "Ontario election result" templates for table rows? This would be more efficient for the Wikipedia server, too, since there would be fewer options to go through in the switch statement. So:

{{Quebec election result|name|Liberal|...}}

{{Quebec election result|name|(P.L.Q./Q.L.P.)|...}}

rather than

{{Canadian election result|QC Liberal|name|...}}}

(note, the name and party parameter ordering could be switched perhaps, as above, to match the order on the Elections Quebec site, to make it easier to compare and verify)

-- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 00:20, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

PS, there is a list of political party name abbreviations at the National Assembly website, but it is not as useful as you might hope. The National Assembly site itself doesn't use them, it just spells out party names, and this list of abbreviations sometimes conflicts with the one used by Elections Quebec (eg, "B.P." is "Bloc pot" on the Elections Quebec site, not "Bloc populaire"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by P.T. Aufrette (talk • contribs) 00:29, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

If our goal is to use a smaller switch statement, I think we would only need to split Template:Canadian party colour into 14 templates, not Template:Canadian election result. We could make the tag {{Canadian election result|QC|party|candidate}} call upon Template:Quebec party colour or Template:Canadian party colour/quebec. I guess the pros of doing that are more user-friendly party names and smaller switch statements. The disadvantages are that it gives us more templates to keep track of and makes it more difficult to stay standardized (for example, making sure that every province uses the same shade of orange for NDP). We could alternatively make the party names more predictable by using QC for all Quebec party names, thus allowing us to change the election template's input to {{Canadian election result|QC|party|candidate}}. That would leave the problem of a large switch statement. How big of a problem is that? —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 00:53, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks like we're nowhere near the threshold for too big of a #switch statement. That said, there are a couple advantages to using {{Canadian election result|QC|party|candidate}} as the input for the election result template instead of the current use that uses a space between QC and party. That would require us to add the jurisdiction in front of all party names in this template and get a bot to replace all current uses of the election template. On the other hand, only a few people actually use these template, and all of them will figure out the short forms of party names. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 17:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Separating this template into province specific ones would be quite useful, and possibly have additional functionality. The only draw back I see is that we are all ready using this one, and a massive number of pages would have to be updated simultaneously. 117Avenue (talk) 03:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it would be too much work. Template: Canadian election result has a transclusion count of 931, so at one edit every six seconds, a bot would have everything fixed in under two hours. But before we do that, we should make sure that we are setting it up just the way we want it so that we don't have to do this large edit twice. My initial impression is that we should (1) copy and paste each jurisdiction's /colour and /name info to, for example, /QC/colour and /QC/name, and remove the leading province code from each #switch item. Then we should (2) change Template:Canadian election result to require jurisdiction as the first unnamed parameter, giving the input {{Canadian election result|QC|party|candidate}}. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 04:24, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd say go for it, then, after due planning. The -transcludes page generator should come in handy. Speaking of bots, we may at some point wish to do a wholesale raid of data from primary sources and mass-create thousands of templates, after format details are settled. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 08:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Since we're talking about making changes, there is one other incongruous thing that could perhaps be changed. The templates are often called, eg, {{Quebec provincial election, 2008/Electoral District/Brome-Missisquoi (provincial electoral district)}}. It's that last disambiguation which is troublesome... it's necessary for the Brome-Missisquoi (provincial electoral district) article about the riding, but not at all for the template, which has a disambiguation already built into its name. It's only there to make the edit button work properly by exactly matching the riding article name (and so there is a potential large headache if the riding name ever changes to a different disambiguation). I think it would be achievable to make it use the simpler {{Quebec provincial election, 2008/Electoral District/Brome-Missisquoi}} instead: just force the riding-display parameter of {{Canadian election result/top}} to always be the undisambiguated riding name, as it almost always is in practice, and key the edit button off that instead, and if the user wishes to have different link text for some reason, a new optional linktext parameter could be used (it would default to riding-display, and so would almost never need to be specified) -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 08:13, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree, the disambiguation is not needed in the template names. I also don't think that the middle-level subpage "/Electoral District/" is needed; it isn't necisary for disambiguation and it does not provide any categorization function that isn't already accomplished by the actual categories. However, those changes don't need to be made at the same time as splitting the /colour page by jurisdiction, so we can start a separate discussion about those changes at Template talk:Canadian election result. As for the colours, are you both okay with putting the provincial colours at Template:Canadian party colour/QC/colour and Template:Canadian party colour/QC/name and making jurisdiction the first unnamed parameter in this template and the election result template (assuming we can get a bot to do the update)? —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, from the point of view of the caller, it should be the first unnamed parameter for {{Canadian election result}} and for {{Canadian party colour}}. From the point of view of the implementation, {{Canadian party colour/QC/name}} makes sense, with a directory structure, since every provincial party will have a unique name. However {{Canadian party colour/colour}} might perhaps remain, so that it checks for trans-jurisdictional party names like "NDP" and handles those within {{Canadian party colour/colour}} and only calls {{Canadian party colour/QC/colour}} in the #default clause to handle the unique-to-each-province parties. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 06:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Would it by any chance be desirable to have a shorter synonym for {{Canadian election result}}? Say, {{CANelec}}, for people who are lazy to type. I don't mind the long formname, but if for any reason a short redirect synonym was desired, this could be used to smooth the transition (no calls would be temporarily broken while the bot was working). I.e.,

1. move {{Canadian election result}} to {{CANelec}}
2. overwrite the newly-created redirect at {{Canadian election result}} with a copy-and-paste of {{CANelec}}
3. edit {{CANelec}} to handle the extra unnamed parameter (temporarily breaking the synonymity)
4. replace calls to {{Canadian election result}} with calls to {{CANelec}} globally, at a leisurely pace
5. when no calls to {{Canadian election result}} remain, delete it and move {{CANelec}} over to {{Canadian election result}} (restoring the synonymity)

-- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 06:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like a good way to set this up. I won't be able to do it myself for a couple weeks, but if you want to get started before then, I'll keep an eye on the page and give sugestions. As for the name, we should go with CanElec given that that is what people are used to. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 21:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to implement P.T. Aufrette's plan some time in the next few days. Does anyone have any amendments to make before I start? —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 07:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I started to make subpages, but then I realized that this can be done using nested switch statements, which saves us from having to keep thirty subpages. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 23:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

row-candidate-name option

There are a lot of tables with party colour in the first column, candidate name in the second, and party in the third (for example, the "Defeated incumbents" table in Alberta general election, 2012). Do you think we should add a "row-candidate-name" option that lets you add the candidate name with formatting as the fourth parameter, and puts that name between the colour and party? —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 01:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

sounds reasonable, if it is commonly used. Frietjes (talk) 17:25, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Template needed

Can someone create a template for the Pauper Party of Ontario (Paupers)? I suggest a light green since other social credit tyupe parties have been given that colour. 147.194.28.69 (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Vancouver NPA Colour Change

Hi there, I was wondering if the colour of the Vancouver Municipal Party Non-Partisan Association (Canadian party colour/list of parties|VAN|NPA) be updated to #360058, and their original template of #CC0000 changed to historical status as their logo and party colour was recently changed from red to purple. Thanks. (Source: [1]) Music + Pageants (talk) 00:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Forces et Démocratie

Just a note that following today's announcement Forces et Démocratie will be needing a colour. To prevent the "Membership changes" section of List of House members of the 41st Parliament of Canada from getting messed up I quickly created Template:Canadian politics/party colours/Forces et Démocratie, using the colour for the CAQ (temporarily, as I know it will be changed once Forces et Démocratie reveals a logo, or something). Anyway, just a note in case anybody didn't know. Tholden28 (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I've since changed the colour to #1006C6, a softened version of the blue seen in their logo (as can be seen here Tholden28 (talk) 16:08, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Choice of colours (again)

Well, I noticed this topic was risen years ago also there is a new party formed in the parliament so I would like to rise this question again. Recently the website of the parliament has put out a floor plan which every party got a colour. I personally think this can be a good reference and we should adopt it because firstly, it is official from the HoC. Next, this is the best way to know what the parties inform the parliament (and the public) what colour/HEX they exactly beside to inquire those party directly. Finially, we don't have to ague about the colour of a certain party (and independent members too) like we did three years ago anymore. Any way, to follow the official floor plan of the house of commons, I will edit the page Party standings in the House of Commons of Canada disregard what HEX these Canadian party colour template ought to be. Any undo to my edit is welcome especially once we have a consensus against my edit. Merci—An Macanese 16:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
BTW on the official page, the CPC uses #002395, NDP uses #FF5800, LPC uses #ED2E38, BQ uses #0088CE, GP uses #427730, Forces et Démocratie uses #01AF58 while those independent MPs get #606860.

Libertarian Color

Libertarian page color is now Gold if you go to their official website and the color is identified as #F2BA00 can we please change it?--Jack Cox (talk) 02:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

• Done. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

One-time parties

After the #Non-contenders discussion above, it was my impression that we would not be filling up this template with parties that only appear once or twice. Instead using the invalid text function to link to the party from the article directly. However, I have been observing Frietjes adding a lot of parties, and recently creating a way to track invalid parameters. 117Avenue (talk) 02:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

• @117Avenue and Frietjes: I agree. Parties that only run one or two candidates in one or two elections don't need to be in the template. I'd be fine with removing them, if only for the purpose of keeping the template smaller. That might also makes the tracking unnecessary, but if someone is making use of the tracking page, I don't see harm in keeping it. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:39, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Strength in Democracy / Forces et Démocratie

Since the Wiki page has been remaned Strength in Democracy, perhaps {{Canadian party colour|CA|Forces et Démocratie|row-name}} should be updated with the (new) English name. FUNgus guy (talk) 21:58, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Minor Ontario Parties: EPP and New Reform

The Equal Parenting Party now has an article, and the official party colour is a purple similar to #A23BEC. Also, the template needs to be updated since the Family Coalition Party of Ontario officially changed their name with Elections Ontario to the New Reform Party of Ontario and will likely be running candidates under that party name in any upcoming elections. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 04:37, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@RA0808: Thanks for the heads up. I think we should wait until closer to the election because the template would be clogged if we added every registered party. If they officially nominate more than one or two candidates in the next election, we'll add them. Also, it looks like New Reform is the result of a merger, not just a re-name, so to be consistent with other mergers we should use a new colour. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:29, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@Arctic.gnome:: Fair enough on EPP, but when will New Reform be given a colour? They're already running their first candidate under the new name in the Simcoe North By-election this week. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 05:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

@RA0808: It looks like the FCP and New Reform now share a page, and the language in the article suggests it was a re-naming rather than a merge, so I'll group the two parties under the same colour. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 16:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks! RA0808 ^talk_contribs 19:09, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

B.C. Parties election colors

Who's currently "in charge" of this? Because it looks like the party colors used for British Columbia, for Social Credit at least, are "wrong" (or at least they don't match the colors used for Social Credit everywhere else...). And I couldn't figure out where/how to fix that... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

@IJBall: Were the BC Socreds affiliated with the federal wing? BC Liberals use a different colour than default Liberal because the BC Liberals are unconnected to the federal party. Maybe the same thing happened with Socreds? —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 17:13, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't know the answer, but I'm hoping someone does, because the B.C. color for the Socreds is so boring and generic that I've stuck with the federal color at a BC elections article because it gives a much better contrast. I'm hoping the B.C. Socred color is just a "mistake", but because I don't know where the original color info is kept, I can't even check the revision history to know for sure... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

@IJBall: It's been light blue since the predecessor of this template was first created by an anonymous user in 2005. There likely has never been a discussion on the topic. The only mention of it I've found is during a discussion of the BC Liberal colour at Template talk:Canadian party colour/Archive 1. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 19:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Coalition colour

@Arctic Gnome: Hey, the #808080 colour scheme for "Coalition" (under 'Non-party entries') would seem to be a sub-optimal choice on WP:ACCESSIBILITY (i.e. colour-contrast) grounds – is there any chance we can get a different colour for that (perhaps a lighter gray, or something)? Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:40, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind! – I figured out how to do it! I changed the "Coalition" color from #808080 to #A9A9A9 (which has a colour-contrast ratio with Black text of 8.94, so it's pretty much AAA accessibility compliant), so I think we're done here... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:48, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Alberta PC and Liberal

Is there a reason Alberta's PC and Liberal parties use different colours than other provinces? Alberta's Conservative and Liberal parties were formed from the NWT's parties, which were in turn branches of the federal parties. Alberta's Conservative party changed its name to "PC" at the same time that other provinces' Conservative parties did so. There doesn't seem to be anything special about Alberta's parties. It's not like with BC's Liberal Party, which was clearly distinct from the old party after it re-formed in 1991. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 00:02, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

"New Democrat" -> "New Democratic"

Can the Ontario NDP row name be changed to "New Democratic" to match the rest of the NDPs across Canada? 65.94.142.207 (talk) 17:34, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

@65.94.142.207: Done. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:54, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Manitoba Party

Can we add a colour for the 2nd incarnation of the Manitoba Party? The colour #D1AA29 is what they use on the Manitoba general election, 2016 page. FUNgus guy (talk) 20:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Independent Liberal (Senate Designation)

Can we add a colour (maybe a variation on Liberal Red) for the Independent Liberal Senators? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canadianpoliticaljunkie (talk • contribs) 01:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Quebec party colours

Hi! I'm proposing to change Quebec party colours to colours that has more resemblance to the actual colours the parties are using. This proposal will also match the colours on French Wikipedia. See: fr:Assemblée nationale (Québec) and Modèle:Code parti politique québécois. The following colors are:

• ADQ: from  #B0C4DE  to  #9370DB 
• CAQ: from  #9372D4  to  #1E90FF 
• PI: from  #00BFFF  to  #AFEEEE 
• PQ: from  #87CEFA  to  #004C9D 
• UN: from  #0088C2  to  #4169E1 

Here are some sources that follow my proposed colours:

• http://ici.radio-canada.ca/resultats-elections-quebec-2014/
• http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/elections-quebec-2014/resultats-des-elections-quebec-2014/#qc
• http://www.cbc.ca/elections/quebecvotes2014/
• http://www.pq.org/
• https://coalitionavenirquebec.org/fr/

Janbryan (talk) 00:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm a bit averse to this change, just because the sovereigntist parties (BQ, PQ, Bloc populaire/nationaliste, etc.) have been kept with a common colour  #87CEFA  ad infinitum on English WP (plus, it looks like our list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada/list of parties is a lot more extensive than the list on the French Wiki). I know that's not a proper excuse, so I've got more, lol. I worry that the darker colour for some of these parties (like the PQ especially) to get confused with the Tories or the UN. I'm certainly willing to accept the colour change on the CAQ and the PI (as long as observers don't confuse the CAQ with other sovereigntist options). After looking at the ADQ's WP page again, I think the purple color works too (though as previously mentioned, I liked the original colour)

Janbryan, thank you for being so patient and for extensively sourcing your argument. I think it's a great idea to try and standardize political party colours between wikis, but I have the remaining concerns (and my own stubbornness). I'm interested to hear if anyone else has a particular opinion one way or another. Bkissin (talk) 01:16, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for inviting me into this debate, Bkissin. There are two schools of thought here, and it's hard for me to choose objectively which is better. My personal preference (that is what I use for maps on my blog; sorry for the shameless plug) is to have a more teal colour of the PQ to match other Quebec nationalist parties. I use blue for the CAQ because it is the more conservative party, and whenever I do get around to making maps with both the UN and PQ, I wouldn't want to use blue for both). But the media, and indeed the parties themselves use blue for the PQ and light blue for the CAQ, and we shouldn't ignore that either. I would say that in the very least we shouldn't be using purple for the CAQ. That seems rather an arbitrary colour choice. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:10, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

As it seems that there's no more new inputs from other users, I'm closing this forum and implementing a colour change for CAQ. Thanks! Janbryan (talk) 03:22, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm down with that! Thanks for your help Janbryan! If I remember correctly, we chose purple for the CAQ because it was the most prominent colour on their website at the time of launch. It definitely does not fit anymore! Bkissin (talk) 18:38, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Senate Liberals

Could someone link Canadian party colour/list of parties|CA|Senate Liberal to the article: Senate Liberal Caucus? McArthur Parkette (talk) 08:45, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2017

I want to change the liberal party colour to an off-red colour to the official red (#EA6D6A) colour. Danielsnider (talk) 14:14, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Already done The default, national Liberal party colour is already #EA6D6A, see Template:Canadian party colour/colour/default. Did you want to change the colour for one of the provincial Liberal parties? Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 05:23, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

National Advancement

Hi there, would it be possible to add an olive colour for the National Advancement Party of Canada? They're running two candidates in the upcoming by-elections.

Thanks, Madg2011 (talk) 22:42, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Trillium Party of Ontario

Since the Trillium Party of Ontario now has a sitting member of the legislature in Ontario (or will when the Legislature resumes) can its colours be updated to #642C85 as reflected on its page and have the short name changed to simply "Trillium"? RA0808 ^talk_contribs 19:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

On it, thanks! That color won't look overly similar to the Freedom Party of Ontario right? Bkissin (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

@Bkissin: To me it looks more purple than the Freedom Party's blue... however feel free to tweak it if necessary. #642C85 seems to be derived directly from their website but if it's changed slightly it shouldn't pose a problem. Man it seems a lot of parties are changing to purple these days! RA0808 ^talk_contribs 00:51, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't realize until seeing the finished product. When I saw the small outline of the colour on the party's wiki page, it looked dark blue. I definitely see purple now. It's also a darker shade than the Family Coalition/CHP, so hopefully that will be enough to differentiate the two. Bkissin (talk) 15:07, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

@Bkissin: Great, now just wait for the cache to purge. Also, the short name is still "Trillium Party of Ontario" which is a bit unwieldy... could it just get shortened to "Trillium"? RA0808 ^talk_contribs 16:32, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

New BC party colours

Hey there,

Just wondering if it would be possible to add colours for some of the new minor parties in BC. 9 parties without a colour contested the last election:

• 4BC - light blue or green
• BC Cascadia Party - green
• BC First - blue or yellow
• B.C. New Republican Party - blue
• BC Refederation Party - dark blue
• British Columbia Action Party - light blue or light green
• Citizens First - blue
• Land Air Water Party - black
• Vancouver Island Party - blue, green or yellow

As well, Your Political Party of British Columbia should be changed to black from green.

Thanks very much! Madg2011 (talk) 21:46, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

United Conservative Party (Alberta)

Ok I have no idea how to edit this thing so, could someone add the new party with #1F75FE until they pick a logo/official colour?

Jarphi (talk) 03:10, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Earl Andrew has added the party using the shortcut AB|UCP. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello don't know how to use this, but please change the UCP colour to #26499d, it is the colour on their website.

It appears they're now using #005D7C as the main colour in their logo. Jarphi (talk) 19:28, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Updated. -- Earl Andrew - talk 23:32, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

National Advancement Party new colours

NAPC have apparently changed colours to something resembling #910f3b, see their new logo and updated colours on website. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 22:38, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Main federal party colour changes

Could someone please update the colours for the 3 main federal political parties so that they match their official colours as stated by the parties themselves or as pulled from their websites. The colours used in their current templates are widely displayed across Canadian election pages yet are incorrect.

The official colourings (with suitable references) are as below:

Liberal: #D71920[2]
Conservative: #1A4782[3]
New Democratic: #F28000[4]

C.david.ham (talk) 18:53, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@C.david.ham:  Not done From the looks of things, your account is almost three years old. You shouldn't be locked out of editing this template. CityOfSilver 16:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@CityOfSilver: And yet, I am not able to edit the template. It says the templates are protected and that I should contact an editor to get any changes made. Please advise how I should move forward with this. C.david.ham (talk) 11:33, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

This is a fairly large change that would require community-wide consensus, as these are the major parties we are talking about. Originally, we picked lighter colours so that we could see text over them, but that is redundant now. I'm not against the changes per se, but I think we can't just make the change unilaterally. We also have to take into account conflicting party colours (e.g. the Communists also use red). -- Earl Andrew - talk 14:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to, again, mark this as answered because it's  Not done and, until there's an effort to get consensus (probably via RFC), nobody's going to unilaterally make this change. It would affect too many articles. CityOfSilver 03:54, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2017

Under the section <!--ONTARIO-->

---

Existing line:

|Moderate={{#if:{{{short|}}}|Moderate|Ontario Moderate Party}}

should be either:

|Moderate=[[Ontario Moderate Party|{{#if:{{{short|}}}|Moderate|Ontario Moderate Party}}]]

or even just:

|Moderate=[[Ontario Moderate Party|Moderate]]

---

Existing line:

|Equal Parenting=Equal Parenting

should be:

|Equal Parenting=[[Equal Parenting Party|Equal Parenting]]

---

and Existing line:

|Trillium|TPO=[[Trillium Party of Ontario]]

should be either:

|Trillium|TPO=[[Trillium Party of Ontario|{{#if:{{{short|}}}|Trillium|Trillium Party of Ontario]]

or even just:

|Trillium|TPO=[[Trillium Party of Ontario|Trillium]]

Thanks 70.49.199.71 (talk) 23:48, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 04:53, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Edit request: Groupe parlementaire québécois

Hi there. I'd like to request that an edit is made to give a colour to Groupe parlementaire québécois. ourcommons.ca currently assigns a different shade of blue to the members that left the Bloc ( hex:7CDBF7 / RGB:124, 219, 247 ), and the group does not have an official website from what I can tell to verify a different colour. So I'd like to request the following is added under the QUEBEC section of the colour subsection of the template:

|GPQ|Groupe parlementaire québécois=7CDBF7

Thanks. --Natural R_X 13:59, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I don't have a problem with this per se. But why would you put it in the QUEBEC section? If we are talking about a parliamentary group within the Federal House of Commons, wouldn't this properly go in the CANADA section? StevenJ81 (talk) 16:04, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

That works too, I just thought it would belong there since they were a Quebec-only party. --Natural R_X 17:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi again. I guess we need the wikilink as well. Could the following line be added to the name template under the CANADA heading?

|Groupe parlementaire québécois|GPQ=[[Groupe parlementaire québécois]]

Thanks! --Natural R_X 14:16, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done StevenJ81 (talk) 14:44, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Rowspan

Hi there. Another edit request, and although it is a simple edit, the code language to implement it is beyond me. I'm looking to add a function that allows the row-name function of the template to span multiple rows. To get a better idea of what I'm talking about, see {{42nd Canada HoC membership change}}. 7 members of the Bloc Québécois caucus resigned and formed the Groupe parlementaire québécois. Instead of starting a new row for each member, I should be able to enter {{Canadian party colour|CA|GPQ|row-name}} with an additional number parameter (e.g. {{...|GPQ|row-name|7}}) so that it spans multiple rows. Can anyone assist? --Natural R_X 19:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:09, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

GPQ colour

Just wondering if the GPQ colour could be changed to a slightly later shade of blue, as the current colour makes it nearly impossible to distinguish from the Bloc (as can be seen most obviously here. Something like this  hex:A5F5F5 / RGB:165, 245, 245 , I was thinking, so it's not too far off from the Bloc (since they're fairly related) but still different enough to easily distinguish. Tholden28 (talk) 02:33, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:09, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

GPQ Part Deux

Since the previous edit was seemingly not done, can the GPQ colour code be changed to #7CDBF7 to align with House of Commons of Canada and the seat diagram on same page. 70.49.159.250 (talk) 15:12, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

 Already done As far as I can see, this is already done at Template:Canadian party colour/colour, all that needs to be done now is to change any incorrect uses of the template to {{Canadian party colour|CA|GPQ}}. Iffy★Chat -- 18:29, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Protection

Seems there are a few requests for edits to this template. I have temporarily lowered the protection level to allow these edits to be made. Please let me know when you are done! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@MSGJ: Is it time to re-instate template protection here? Iffy★Chat -- 18:32, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Okay done that — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:56, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Northern Ontario (Heritage) Party

The Northern Ontario Heritage Party has revived, and ditched the "heritage" part of its name. So, I'm not sure if we need to create a new "Northern Ontario" entry using the NOHP colour, or change the current entry by dropping "Heritage". Thoughts? FUNgus guy (talk) 05:25, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Would recommend adding a new "Northern Ontario Party" to mark the break from the NOHP and not break older NOHP linking. Also the new party is pretty resolute in using NOP as their short form and the party's actual colour is darker than that used for the NOHP on Wikipedia (#a10022 was pulled from the party's new logo). Perhaps now would be a good chance to update the colour to match? NorthOnt001 (talk) 20:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 23 May 2018

Add to ONTARIO section:

Consensus=Consensus Ontario Consensus=#099edc

Bkissin (talk) 01:47, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Bkissin: Although much of the text on their website is #099edc, the logo on their website seems to use #00BAF2 instead. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:13, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Works for me Ahecht! I would do it myself, but the page is still protected. Bkissin (talk) 18:16, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Bkissin:  Done --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:25, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks Ahecht! I fixed the hex code on the article itself as well! Bkissin (talk) 18:26, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Go Vegan/Vegan Environmental Party of Ontario colour?

Hey everybody! So I finally got around to making an article for the Vegan Environmental Party/Go Vegan, a minor provincial party in Ontario. They don't have much of a web presence, so I wasn't sure which colour to go with. I think #336033, which we use for the federal Animal Protection Party of Canada may be the best to go with, but I figured I'd get feedback from other editors as well. Bkissin (talk) 16:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

PPC colour

Hi there. I'd like to request edits for the People's Party of Canada.

Could the following line be added to the colour template under the CANADA heading?

|People's Party of Canada|PPC=2A317C

And could the following line be added to the name template under the CANADA heading?

|People's Party of Canada|PPC=People's Party of Canada

Thanks! --Natural R_X 17:26, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Enterprisey (talk!) 07:51, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Reform Liberal Party of Newfoundland

I was wondering if the Reform Liberal Party could get an official color (#DB7093). I'm making an infobox for the 1975 election article and need "Canadian party colour|NL|Reform Liberal|nohash" to add its color. Thanks!--Mr.Election (talk) 04:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Edit Request: National Advancement Party changed names again

Good morning all. The National Advancement Party of Canada (originally founded as the Democratic Advancement Party of Canada) has changed its name again to the National Citizen's Alliance. I'm just requesting that this name be added to the existing template so that it creates continuity among the articles. The party has a candidate running in the York—Simcoe by-election, so I figured rather than put the candidate down in the CANElec template as National Advancement (to get the correct party colour) and get that edit reverted, I would request the new name be added here. Thanks for your help everyone! Bkissin (talk) 14:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit Request: National Advancement Party changed names again

Good morning all. The National Advancement Party of Canada (originally founded as the Democratic Advancement Party of Canada) has changed its name again to the National Citizen's Alliance. I'm just requesting that this name be added to the existing template so that it creates continuity among the articles. The party has a candidate running in the York—Simcoe by-election, so I figured rather than put the candidate down in the CANElec template as National Advancement (to get the correct party colour) and get that edit reverted, I would request the new name be added here. Thanks for your help everyone! Bkissin (talk) 14:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit Request: National Advancement Party changed names again

Good morning all. The National Advancement Party of Canada (originally founded as the Democratic Advancement Party of Canada) has changed its name again to the National Citizen's Alliance. I'm just requesting that this name be added to the existing template so that it creates continuity among the articles. The party has a candidate running in the York—Simcoe by-election, so I figured rather than put the candidate down in the CANElec template as National Advancement (to get the correct party colour) and get that edit reverted, I would request the new name be added here. Thanks for your help everyone! Bkissin (talk) 14:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Parti Québécois colour

Hi,

The colour for the Parti Québécois should be a dark blue, darker than the blue of the CAQ. In Quebec politic, the PQ is always in a darker blue than the CAQ, in all the medias, on the National Assembly channel and on the french version of Wikipedia. The colours of the PQ and CAQ now displayed in the National Assembly page can be confusing for many Quebecers.

Instead of #87CEFA , I propose this colour: #006699

Thanks! Simr12 (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

This was discussed before here and was decided against, as we wanted to keep all of the sovereigntist (BQ & PQ) party colours the same. -- Earl Andrew - talk 21:24, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

NL Alliance

Hello, I'd like to add the following party colour template for the NL Alliance Party:   #F2BA00 with input text NL|NLAlliance or NL|Alliance, whichever is less confusing. Jebussez (talk) 17:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Done! -- Earl Andrew - talk 22:12, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

ISG Colour

Hi there. I'd like to request an adjustment to the colour default template. Could:

|ISG|Independent Senators Group=B7B7B7

be changed to:

|ISG|Independent Senators Group=1Bb1C1F

Thanks! --Natural R_X 16:17, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: A 7 character RGB code produces white (1Bb1C1F is greater than FFFFFF). {{colorbox|1Bb1C1F}} ->  . Please check the colour you really want. And it would help if you could state why you want the colour changed. Is there consensus? Cabayi (talk) 16:43, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

I would probably disagree with adjusting the Independent Senators Group to any color other than our standard Independent color. If we wanted to change the color for the Senate Liberal Caucus or those who sit as Independent Conservatives, I would prefer if we could do something like this. In this historical version of the Senate floor plan, you can see that Independent Liberal members are the typical Independent grey with a Liberal red outline. I don't think it's possible to make the change because I think we only work in full colour in the template here, but if anyone knows how, this might be a good change.Bkissin (talk) 16:56, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, the colour should have been   1B1C1F, I forgot to eliminate the extra 'b' changing it to upper case. This colour is on the banner of the ISG's website, which is the dominant identifying colour and also used on their social media accounts. Having members of the Independent Senators Group and non-affiliated senators the same colour implies they are equal in affiliation, when they're not; the Independent Senators Group is a caucus. I have proposed this colour change to make the distinction between non-affiliated and ISG senators more clear. The two different shades of grey may be hard to distinguish, and that current second shade of grey (  B7B7B7) isn't based on anything. So overall, this change is an improvement in that it's based on something official and helps distinguish ISG and NA senators visually. --Natural R_X 18:19, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Bkissin, what do you think about the point that this group is different from the "actually independent" (non-affiliated) senators? Enterprisey (talk!) 05:12, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Eh, I'm still on the fence, but will accept any consensus that is made. In the articles for the Irish Dáil Éireann/Next Irish general election, the Independent Alliance (Ireland) is listed under both the traditional grey   and a more neutral  , while the Independents 4 Change use  . This would provide precedent for both Natural RX's proposal and my suggestion to maintain the status quo. Again, I'm fine either way. Bkissin (talk) 13:32, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm always open to leaning on precedent, but I fail to see how Bkissin's examples were chosen for a particular reason. The first one just leans on a general 'independent politician grey', and the political groups website and logos use an even variety of colours instead of having a dominant one, so I can understand why that was left grey. The second one's colour template does not have any discussion or significant edit history, and I cannot locate an official website, so I fail to see how it was established for any reason beyond a user's judgement. --Natural R_X 19:35, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Discussion publicised at WT:PPAP#Independent. Cabayi (talk) 07:30, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

The proposed colour looks black on my monitor. Would it make sense for ISG to adopt  , which is the shade used by coalitions and is a bit darker than  , the shade used by independets ? —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:12, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

It practically is black, yes, but again, it is not a darker shade of grey as per my points above: that shade of grey is just us making it up with little valid official reason, and it is more easily distinguishable from non-affiliated senators. I'm going off of the colour used by the ISG. --Natural R_X 13:05, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template.

So what colour do you want & have consensus for?? There's no point reactivating the request when the discussion is just a stream of suggested & declined colours. I have no idea from the discussion above what the outcome was. Cabayi (talk) 14:23, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Cabayi The colour is   1B1C1F. The other suggested colours do not address my points that the current colour used in the template (  B7B7B7) isn't based on anything, whereas 1B1C1F is, and it more visually distinguishable from the colour for non-affiliated senators. I'm not going to bother pushing it since there seems to be no effort to come to consensus based on the merits of my argument, but just want to make it clear that what stands now is without rationale. --Natural R_X 20:40, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done Consensus wasn't building around any other colour, so 1B1C1F it is. Cabayi (talk) 21:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I've made a minor tweak from to  1B1C1F to   35373D and won't be offended if reverted, but wanted to outline my thinking here.

Our "house style" for Canadian federal political party colours here on Wikipedia has long been somewhat lighter and/or less saturated than their parties brand standard (ie Liberal   #EA6D6A vs   #d71921; Conservative   #6495ED vs   #164179) with all the main parties clustered in the same sort of brightness/saturation ballpark ----- this arguably makes them look more visually coherent next to one another, makes for somewhat less austere graphical effect in some charts and graphs, and allows a few of the visual applications we have to work a bit better; it also makes them a little more timeless for working across wide spans of history (while exact party pantones shift with time, generally more frequently than the logos themselves). I realize that's a matter of taste and other countries have taken a different approach.

 1B1C1F is really dark--almost black when placed next to light colours---and especially when placed next to the party colours and independent grey clashes as well outside the brightness/saturation norm. That makes the ISG category jump out visually as being fundamentally different than any other categorization of parliamentarian. Black has also connotative connection with the office of Speaker and has been used in some other charts to mean "vacant seat".

So looking at its HSB value, I've kept the hue value the same but kicked the brightness from 12% to 24% to make it more squarely charcoal. That seems in the spirit of the graphics on the ISG website. Happy to hear other arguments here. The Tom (talk) 02:01, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Looks great to me, no qualms since it's just a slight brightness change. --Natural R_X 20:38, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Reopening

 Reopening this question - So full thanks to User:Natural RX for taking the initiative on this one last fall, and I think at the time lifting the charcoal colour off the ISG website was definitely the most appropriate solution.

However, since then, a new contender has popped up with a degree of official backing and I was wondering if it may be worth discussing.

On video footage produced by the Parliamentary broadcasting service, the on-screen chyron graphics were revamped between December 2018 and January 2019 (coincident with the launch of HD feeds from new equipment in the West Block and Senate Building, I believe). While a grey was used for ISG on the old version in 2018, for 2019 they've begun using a shade of purple (I pulled  #472d53 from a screengrab). Here's an example.

So I dug a bit deeper, and starting in November 2018 ISG switched over to using purple branding on all its content on social media. A look at the Twitter feed now is really, really purple. So it stands to reason sometime a few weeks after we last discussed this here, someone inside the ISG decided on purple, and then the Parliamentary broadcast service moved into alignment shortly thereafter. It has a certain logic, as its really the last significant colour not closely associated in Canada with any major political party or strain of political thought.

The social media content uses a palette of a couple of shades of purple,  #4f0053,  #442850,  #380036 and  #845b87. I'm going to nominate the lightest,  #845b87, as the one that would probably play nicest alongside      .

Thoughts? The Tom (talk) 20:58, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Agreed with all your points, looks good for me, thanks for picking up on that! --Natural R_X 02:48, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

ISG

Nice purply color.

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:40, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

PPC party colour

Over on the List of candidates by riding for the 43rd Canadian federal election talk page we've had a complaint about how hard it is to read the party name in the PPC column headers. Would it be possible to change it to that of a former party, one that's easier to read? G. Timothy Walton (talk) 19:03, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

CPC color changes - Let's discuss

Hello all! I noticed a situation over at the talk page for Opinion polling for the 2019 Canadian federal election and I wanted to get some of us together to discuss the recent colour changes, specifically to the Conservative Party. @Ec1801011:, I appreciate you being WP:BOLD and making the color change on your own so that it better fit the party's actual colour. The concerns that @Impru20: and @Williamefwilson: had were around how this would fit with the variety of other articles that depend on this template (I may be putting words in their mouths, there may be other concerns as well). Usually when we look at changing something like the colour a party uses in WP, we try to find some kind of consensus first before taking action. Rather than getting into a revert war, let's go ahead and talk about your proposed changes here. @EarlAndrew:. Bkissin (talk) 19:39, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Based on our discussion in reference to the People's Party colour, I believe the consensus is to go with lighter shades (at least for major parties) so that text can be seen on top.-- Earl Andrew - talk 19:43, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Being bold is one thing, and another very different thing is to show a complete disregard for Wikipedia's consensus-building procedures and to dare other users to keep issuing warnings to them or to even report them if they wish over their own behaviour. Indeed, there seems to be a consistent behaviour from this user on that respect, not just on this specific issue but on many others as well, and as I pointed out to them here, if they do not back down and revert their changes until a proper consensus develops, a report would probably be due over serious WP:CIR concerns.

This said, and returning to the actual content issue, I don't have any personal preference for the colour to be used. However, the suggested change implies major changes in how the Canadian party colour template system is currently designed. Unlike most other countries, Canadian party templates use lighter shades of the actual colours without having a strong preference for the ones actually used by the parties. This affects the use that is given to these templates, to the point that opinion polling pages, for instance, use them to shade the leading party. This means that changes to a dark shade of the colour makes text essentially unreadable, and this automatically affects all articles where these templates are used to shade text backgrounds.

The main issue here is that if this CPC colour change is to be allowed, then 1) all other Canadian party templates should be changed to reflect the actual party colours as well; and 2) something must be done with the use given to these Canadian party colour templates across Wikipedia. I don't know whether there is some previous written consensus on this that could help on the understanding of the issue. Impru20^talk 19:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

First Nations Party (Saskatchewan)

There was a short-lived First Nations Party in Saskatchewan in the early 2000s, that ran a few candidates. There isn't an entry for it on the list of parties. Could someone provide a colour for it? Thanks, Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 04:43, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey Mr Serjeant Buzfuz! We'd be happy to help! Do you mean the First Peoples National Party of Canada that ran in some federal ridings in SK, or the Aboriginal People's Party that ran provincially in the 80s? It looks like the First Nations Party of Saskatchewan is listed as a historical party on List of political parties in Saskatchewan, but there is no information about it. If that's the party you're talking about, I would say that the color should probably correspond with the colour we have for the other Aboriginal parties in Canada (Either #E9967A, #FFAB00, or #CD5C5C). Let me know what you think. Bkissin (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the delay in responding. Yes, it's the First Nations Party in the red-link that I'm referring to. As far as I can tell, the FNP only fielded two candidates, in two by-elections in 2001; see the table of "ELECTION RESULTS BY ELECTORAL DIVISION" prepared by Sask Archives, pp. 214-89 and 2.14-120. On the one hand, that seems rather sparse to have their own entry, but it is an official provincial publication, so I think it would be useful to have them included in the table of party colours, but similar colour to the other parties you mention, to group by themes/affiliations. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Parti pour l'Indépendance du Québec

Not sure if it'll survive long enough to be worth adding, but Elections Canada lists a party named Parti pour l'Independance du Quebec. Not sure if they have a color, but judging by their website perhaps a shade of yellow would work? AceSevenFive (talk) 15:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

I almost think we should set it as 87CEFA (our usual sovereigntist colour) or 00BFFF, the colour we use for the pur et dur Parti Indépendantiste, as there is a lot of overlap between people who ran for the PI provincially and those who ran for Parti pour l'Independence du Quebec federally. Bkissin (talk) 19:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 22 October 2019

Add the National Citizens Alliance with colorcode 710039 (present on its article page) or 000000 (present on its logo). Could probably add the Canadian Nationalist Party in with a darker shade of the Liberal Party color as well since they're both using red. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 18:43, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks HapHaxion! I would suggest a name addition so that it maintains the same party colour as National Advancement Party of Canada and Democratic Advancement Party of Canada, since they are all the same party. Is it possible just to list the Template-protection (or expand it to Extended Confirmed Users perhaps?) Bkissin (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done NCA has colours in burgundy; CNP in ensign red. Sceptre (talk) 19:53, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 26 October 2019

Add NuclearElevator (talk) 08:23, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cabayi (talk) 08:47, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 26 October 2019

Green NuclearElevator (talk) 08:26, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cabayi (talk) 08:48, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Federal and BC Greens

The federal Greens need their colour changed to 3D9B35 The BC Greens also need their own colour of 00BC6A — Preceding unsigned comment added by NuclearElevator (talk • contribs) 09:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

References

Animal Protection Party

So, apparently the Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada is now the Animal Protection Party of Canada. I suggest a new entry for Animal Protection, using the same colour as AAEVPC. FUNgus guy (talk) 04:28, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

We don't even need to go that far. Since it's just a name change, we can just go in and add the current name in the template. In the meantime, it's better to code them with AAEVPC so that when the name change is made by an admin with permissions, the change is already there. Bkissin (talk) 14:21, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

That would their name for previous elections though. -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:48, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Bkissin and Earl Andrew: There must be a way to change the name in respect of the 2019 election while leaving the old name in place for previous elections. It is problematic that in the table at 2019 Canadian federal election#Detailed analysis, the party is listed as "Animal Alliance" when the party name as reported by reliable sources (including Elections Canada) is "Animal Protection Party" [5] or "Animal Protection Party of Canada" [6]. Mathew5000 (talk) 14:16, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

In Template:Canadian party colour/name, the name should be able to be changed (and a separate line can be created for AAEVPC and Animal Protection. In terms of the party colour, in Template:Canadian party colour/colour, you can put whatever name you choose for Animal Protection under Template:Canadian party colour/name next to AAEVPC, separated by a |, that way they'll share the same hexcode. Before the template was protected, we used to do this all the time. Bkissin (talk) 14:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)