Template talk:Czech elections

Template standartization

moved from User talk:Jklamo

Hi. I'm in the middle of standardising all the election templates. The standard is for the template to include parliamentary elections, upper house (Senate) elections, presidential elections and referenda (i.e. anything at the national level), as well as including the national flag (see a few British, German, Lithuanian for examples). Local and Municipal elections shouldn't be on the same template.

The second problem is the style of your template, as it will not fit a 800x600 screen if three more election years are added.

I'd appreciate it if you could revert it back to the standarised version. Thanks Number 57 19:48, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but i do not think that removal of municipal and regional elections in the name of "standartization" is wise. I think, that is good to have all czech elections in one template (so template can be extended with senate elections) with timeline.

About dimensions, it is not actual problem. Three more elections can be added without problem. So in the worst possibility "problem" can occur in 2010. I think that 800x600 incompatibility will not be problem in that time, same as now is not problem 640x480 incompatibility.

I will welcome some style and code tweaks, but not replacement with template, that with almost same dimensions bring non-complexity and timeline removal. --Jklamo 23:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I have moved the municipal and regional elections to Template:Czech local elections. European elections are on Template:European Union elections. There is now a complete set of these templates for all Europe. Number 57 15:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this. —Nightstallion (?) 15:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

EU Parliament election?

Should the European Parliament election, 2004 (Czech Republic) article be added to this template? --Jfruh (talk) 02:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Have done. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Presidential Elections prior to 2013

Why are the presidential elections prior to 2013 excluded from the list? It should help wikireaders easily find articles associated with the topic, so why to prevent them to read about the 2003 and 2008 election just because it was not a popular vote? It was an election after all! Cimmerian praetor (talk) 12:47, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Agreed 100% they should be on here, they are elections regardless of being popular elected or not. A particular [admin] removes it without any consensus or attempt t get any because he personally feels that only popularly elected elections are elections to be counted as such.Lihaas (talk) 12:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

There has been a long-standing consensus that non-popular elections are not included in these templates. For instance, this is why there are only two presidential elections on {{German elections}}, and why only 1848 and post-1958 presidential elections are included on {{French elections}} etc. As seen elsewhere, unfortunately Lihaas does not understand the concept of consensus and frequently claims anyone who disagrees with him is guilty of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which is very tiresome. Number 57 15:31, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Number 57 on this; though if there actually *IS* a new consensus, we can of course change the standard. —Nightstallion 16:59, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

The exclusion of non-popular elections seems bizarre, particularly since Wikipedia has articles on many of them. Readers looking at the current shape of this template would get the impression that the Czech Republic had no presidential elections before 2013, and that is simply false.

To the editors who say that there is a consensus on this: please point to the discussions which have formed that consensus. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:22, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

No reason has been offered for the exclusion of nonpopular elections, other than some claimed prior consensus for which no evidence is offered.

Unless that evidence is produced, I will add the other elections to this template. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:40, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I cannot seem to find the discussion that decided it, as I recall it was several years ago (2006 or 2007). However, I can find a few discussions from back then that show that it had been agreed (e.g. here "Turns out it is an indirect election. I assume we should remove it from the template, then?"). Number 57 09:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

On a separate note, I'm not really sure of the usefulness of having so many articles on indirect elections, particularly those which are mere parliamentary votes. For instance, I was thinking of combining all the articles on {{Israeli presidential elections}} into a single article. Number 57 09:40, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I think you are confusing the state of the articles with the significance of the topic.

Some of the the articles are currently quite weak, but there is a lot more to such an election than simply the number of votes cast. The process of nomination is often lengthy and contested, and in any such election I have studied it is widely-reported. Most parliamentary votes merit only a line or a paragraph in a newspaper, but the election of a head of state is a much bigger issue. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 19:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)