This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
What exactly is the purpose of the Huffington Post blog post describing Pleitez? It only includes his biography and declares that he could potentially be the second member of his generation in Congress. How is this one blog post even relevant to the "Campaign" section of this Wikipdia article? OCNative (talk) 07:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
This is a compromise between editors seeking to insert more information about Pleitez (such as User:2eXcL), who have been feeling burned ever since his article lost at AfD, and general WP guidelines. The original 2eXcL addition was too long and gushy; I edited it down, then you edited it down further to just "In mid-March, The Huffington Post commented on Pleitez, noting his youth." in this edit. That was too vague, so I made it the more specific "In mid-March, The Huffington Post called Pleitez a Millennial and said if elected he would become the second member of his generation to serve in Congress." It's okay with me to move it up to the Pleitez introduction in the earlier section, but given that the article about him was deleted it seems a bit of reasonable perspective to include. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
It makes much more sense in the candidates section, so I've moved it there and tightened up the language. OCNative (talk) 05:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Seeing that the infobox basically just contains the results, would everyone be okay with removing it? Election infoboxes are better suited for larger elections – they're not meant for pages like this. You would have to agree that its contribution to the article is minimal. – Zntrip 18:20, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, well I see your point, but I don't know, I think they kinda make the article look more "official" (although i'm sure there is a better word i could use, i'm just tired and can't think of one.) I always feel house races don't get enough attention during normal election cycles, while Senate races, governors races, and of course Presidential races get big articles. These special house elections I feel give the opportunity for some house races to get a bit more detail than they normally would, and i feel they do deserve more attention than they get. So I like the idea of the info-box being there. I was also gonna ad an image of the district (like there are for the Illinois 5th, and NY 20th special elections.) That's just my opinion. I'm interested to here what others have to say.Bluedemocrat (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Yah the info boxes are a more recent trend. They exist for the special elections so far this year. But not the years before. I've toyed with the idea of going back and adding boxes for the the ones from last year, just haven't had the time yet.Bluedemocrat (talk) 02:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Does anybody know were a tally on the write-in candidates votes might be, I cant find the result anywhere, and it would be nice to be able to add something to her slot, rather than it just be blank.Bluedemocrat (talk) 20:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
We have to wait until the official results come out, that's when write-in results are reported. – Zntrip 22:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)