Template talk:Taiwanese elections

Protected edit request on 3 December 2014

The Republic of China local elections, 2014 is now over can an admin de-italics 2014 on the local elections. Thank you — ASDFGH =] ^talk? 20:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Done. Number 57 22:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

WP:OWN

@Number 57: @Amakuru: Stop reverting edits for reasons like "not standard" or "should be discussed".

• Legislative elections is ambiguous. They are Legislative Yuan elections as opposed to councillor elections.
• By-elections arbitrarily includes 2015 without article, but not the various other by-elections, including those other types

I doubt you disagree with both of the above, but you reverted simply because I didn't discuss. Even if you disagree, you should give a reason. You linked Local elections in Taiwan without discussion. Shall I revert that too? Ythlev (talk) 22:49, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

It was actually yourself that added the link to Local elections first. I readded it when I realised it was a positive (and fairly standard) addition you had made to the template.

You are welcome to add the other by-election years if you know them. Many templates have an incomplete list of certain types of elections.

Reverting non-standard formatting is a perfectly acceptable thing to do. This is part of a series of templates for all countries, and a consistent layout is important. You have repeatedly tried to change the format of the template (for instance, trying to put the years in backwards order) and been reverted on each occasion by three different users, so this is clearly not an OWNERSHIP issue. I think the issue is more with your refusal to accept that this layout is what editors expect, and deviations should be discussed rather than forced into it.

This leads me onto my final point. From my watchlist, I have noticed that your editing over the last few weeks has been unnecessarily combative, with a high proportion of reverts (including going well beyond 3RR at 2020 Taiwanese legislative election, which I could well have blocked you for, but let you off with a warning), repeated attempts to force edits back into articles, not to mention the undiscussed and uncontroversial moves of numerous articles. I would strongly suggest you tone this down, as it's unlikely that the leniency you were shown at 2020 Taiwanese legislative election will be repeated. I certainly have lost patience. Number 57 23:03, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@Number 57: This is part of a series of templates for all countries, and a consistent layout is important. Different countries have different systems, different readers and editors. Why should it be consistent? Point me to a WP policy or consensus that says so. You are welcome to add the other by-election years if you know them. I don't get your position on this. Should that category include all known by-elections of any type or only Legislative Yuan elections? And what should the non-existent article titles be? I don't feel particularly welcomed to make any edits because I have no idea what you consider "positive" or "standard".

unnecessarily combative. Is that so? Tell me what I should have done then. Regarding disputes such as vote share, election names, and candidates, I have been the one opening discussions. The last one you've reverted three times by the way. Even when a discussion in opened, if the opposing user does not respond (User talk:Lmmnhn#Taiwanese local elections infobox), there is no way to continue improving articles with policy-compliant edits without risking locking or blocking. I don't know how you admins are chosen or how you do things, but you are often making Wikipedia worse. The template Template:Efn native lang was left incorrect for a week because there was a dispute and instead of resolving the dispute based on policies, the administrators chose to lock it to the incorrect version. You can certainly block me, but you would just be making Wikipedia worse (Criticism of Wikipedia#Criticism of process).

Regarding indirect elections

I propose that the inclusion of indirect presidential elections be discussed, since they are elections too and did happen on Taiwan. If they are not to be included, I propose that we somehow explicitly define the criteria for the inclusion/exclusion of certain items on the navbox. Tjs2012 (talk) 06:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I think the criteria is quite simple – for presidential elections, ones held without a public vote shouldn't be in this template. Cheers, Number 57 11:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good. Should we define what an election is then (be specific in the title for example) for disambiguation? Tjs2012 (talk) 04:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't really understand what you mean. Number 57 19:36, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for allowing me to elaborate. The issues I am raising with this template are as follows: (1) The definition of Taiwan, and (2) the definition of elections. For the first issue, the current template contains direct elections all held on Taiwan, but for two different political entities--Japanese Taiwan and the Republic of China. The only thing in common is that they control Taiwan at different points of Taiwan's history. With Taiwan now commonly used to represent the Republic of China government (as is the consensus on this wiki), use of the ROC flag will cause confusion where the earlier local elections would be misunderstood to be part of the ROC's elections, where in fact ROC does not control Taiwan at the time. The second issue is that the term election is quite broad, with popular, direct elections being only a subset. For example, the template Elections and referendums in South Korea contain all presidential elections, although many such elections were also held indirectly. I believe with the similarity between the two countries' history, that template is a good reference. Therefore with regards to the Taiwanese template, with the title "Elections..." we are leaving out a substantial amount of electoral history.

I am proposing three approaches to this issue; I am fine with either, just that what is included have to be well-defined unlike what it is now. (1) "Least change" approach: Remove the ROC flag to avoid confusion and rename the template title to Popular Elections (or Direct Elections) and Referendums in Taiwan. This way we can remove all presidential elections before 1996 and keep the Japanese elections. (2) "Lumper" approach: similar to the South Korean template, with the definition of elections in the general sense, add all indirect presidential elections from 1954 onwards. Indirect Control Yuan supplemental elections can also be added under this approach. Remove the ROC flag. (3) ROC-Taiwan-centric approach. Keep the flag, but remove all Japanese elections. Depending on whether the indirect elections are to be added or not, the title can be changed accordingly. Tjs2012 (talk) 01:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Also regarding flag use, I just saw that the most recent edit mentioned that flags are used on these templates to symbolize current control. I am actually fine with that, but I would also like to see sources that document this rule. Thanks! Tjs2012 (talk) 01:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I disagree that there could be any confusion; it's simply the case that the current flag of the country is used (see e.g. {{South African elections}} or {{Zambian elections}} – both countries had different flags during different political eras). I also don't see any need to change the status quo here. Number 57 13:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

That's great then. I don't mind leaving the ROC flag on, although the countries you gave as an example were continuous entities according to international law (like SA) unlike the case of Taiwan. I'll go ahead and implement the "least changes" approach to clarify the type of election to be included in the template. I also like the wording in which the template uses "... in Taiwan" instead of "... of Taiwan." This allows for different political entities that control Taiwan to be included rather than just the ROC which is now commonly known as Taiwan. Tjs2012 (talk) 03:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)