2022 Alaska's at-large congressional district special election: Revision history

18 July 2024

• curprev 11:2511:25, 18 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,259 bytes −494‎ Once again, does not need its own section undo Tags: Manual revert Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
• curprev 11:2411:24, 18 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,753 bytes −2,520‎ What I mean by “alternative results” is that this is entirely hypothetical. The election did not use this system of experimenting with Begich’s votes, so stop misleading people undo Tags: Manual revert Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
• curprev 04:2704:27, 18 July 2024‎ CRGreathouse talk contribs‎ m 95,273 bytes +5‎ →‎Pairwise comparison: phrasing undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 02:0502:05, 18 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 95,268 bytes +3,126‎ Restored revision 1234761555 by Citation bot (talk): This is the exact same set of results, just displayed in a table that lets you see Begich getting more votes than Peltola... undo Tags: Twinkle Undo Reverted

16 July 2024

• curprev 06:3506:35, 16 July 2024‎ Headbomb talk contribs‎ 92,142 bytes −1‎ ce undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 01:2601:26, 16 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,143 bytes −116‎ This isn't true undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 01:2601:26, 16 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,259 bytes −494‎ This does not need its own section undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 01:2501:25, 16 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,753 bytes −2,515‎ You cannot put in an alternative set of results. We've gone over this. undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 00:5800:58, 16 July 2024‎ Citation bot talk contribs‎ 95,268 bytes −179‎ Alter: template type, title. Add: date, jstor, eprint, class, authors 1-1. Removed URL that duplicated identifier. Removed access-date with no URL. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Headbomb | Category:CS1 errors: invisible characters | #UCB_Category 6/46 undo

15 July 2024

• curprev 16:5416:54, 15 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 95,447 bytes +316‎ No edit summary undo Tag: Visual edit

14 July 2024

• curprev 04:3904:39, 14 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 95,131 bytes +2,926‎ No edit summary undo Tag: Visual edit

13 July 2024

• curprev 20:5520:55, 13 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 92,205 bytes −11‎ I don't think "social choice theorists" means "every single social choice theorist", but I can use "many" to clarify if you find it ambiguous undo Tag: Visual edit
• curprev 20:4520:45, 13 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,216 bytes +29‎ How about this. It directly mentions that the sources cited are reports by social choice theorists. It can’t be framed as all social choice theorists. undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
• curprev 20:4320:43, 13 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,187 bytes +32‎ Please stop undoing these edits meant for clarity for no reason. undo Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
• curprev 20:2220:22, 13 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 92,155 bytes −80‎ It's even less up for debate than the existence of climate change; the perverse response in this election is a mathematical (rather than empirical) fact. undo
• curprev 20:0820:08, 13 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,235 bytes +34‎ First, you didn’t need to undo everything just to get rid of one word. Second, this discussion is a lot more up for debate than the existence climate change undo Tags: Undo Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
• curprev 17:4217:42, 13 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 92,201 bytes −34‎ Word "some" implies a handful, rather than reflecting overall consensus. I wouldn't describe the consensus on climate change by saying "some scientists say global warming is real" undo Tags: Undo Reverted
• curprev 15:5015:50, 13 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,235 bytes +34‎ These two little edits make this a lot easier to read for those who are not election experts. Please remember that Wikipedia is supposed to be accessible to everyone. And please note that not every social choice theorist in the world commented on this election, thus the word "some". You could even say "a group of" undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 15:4415:44, 13 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 92,201 bytes +1,101‎ No edit summary undo Tag: Visual edit
• curprev 15:2815:28, 13 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,100 bytes +27‎ No edit summary undo
• curprev 15:2015:20, 13 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,073 bytes +5‎ No edit summary undo
• curprev 15:1815:18, 13 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,068 bytes +41‎ Why was this taken out? Its crucial to Yang's point undo
• curprev 06:0806:08, 13 July 2024‎ Masterzora talk contribs‎ 91,027 bytes −1,118‎ Fix CS1 template errors. undo
• curprev 03:3803:38, 13 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 92,145 bytes +170‎ No edit summary undo Tag: Visual edit

12 July 2024

• curprev 23:3623:36, 12 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,975 bytes +41‎ No edit summary undo
• curprev 23:3423:34, 12 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,934 bytes −138‎ No edit summary undo

11 July 2024

• curprev 05:1505:15, 11 July 2024‎ GoingBatty talk contribs‎ 92,072 bytes −66‎ →‎top: fixed references undo
• curprev 04:5504:55, 11 July 2024‎ Citation bot talk contribs‎ 92,138 bytes −110‎ Altered template type. Add: jstor, eprint, class, authors 1-1. Removed URL that duplicated identifier. Removed access-date with no URL. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by GoingBatty | #UCB_toolbar undo
• curprev 04:4704:47, 11 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 92,248 bytes +1,589‎ simplify+shorten description undo Tag: Visual edit

10 July 2024

• curprev 04:5704:57, 10 July 2024‎ 69.5.112.154 talk‎ 90,659 bytes −413‎ The 2021 Mnpls Ward 2 and 2022 Oakland District 4 school director elections. They had no Condorcet winner to elect. Burlington and Alaska, IRV failed to elect the CW that existed. undo Tags: Undo references removed

9 July 2024

• curprev 18:5618:56, 9 July 2024‎ Jasavina talk contribs‎ 91,072 bytes +413‎ Added second anomalous example and a citation for both undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 18:2218:22, 9 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 90,659 bytes +18‎ Probably better words. This version comes from Stormy's save at 00:33, 9 July 2024 . The modifications afterward only muddy the narrative into something that appears to just be non-factual. undo
• curprev 18:1518:15, 9 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 90,641 bytes −2,304‎ Reverting back to the simplest, complete, and accurate account. undo Tags: Manual revert references removed Disambiguation links added
• curprev 02:4602:46, 9 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,945 bytes +5‎ No edit summary undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 02:4502:45, 9 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ m 92,940 bytes −4‎ No edit summary undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 02:4402:44, 9 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 92,944 bytes −93‎ No edit summary undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 02:3902:39, 9 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 93,037 bytes 0‎ See talk page undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 02:3202:32, 9 July 2024‎ Closed Limelike Curves talk contribs‎ 93,037 bytes +2,986‎ No edit summary undo Tags: Reverted Visual edit
• curprev 00:5000:50, 9 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 90,051 bytes −590‎ If we aren't going to mention negative weighting than I think condensing it back down to one paragraph is ok. We don't need to give the basic description of center squeeze because it is linked. By describing how center squeeze played out in this election, we are effectively describing how it works. undo Tag: Reverted
• curprev 00:3300:33, 9 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 90,641 bytes −17‎ I can't think of a good way to mention RCV in the lede without it making the background section redundant, so I am returning it to one section in order to restore the original flow. undo
• curprev 00:2400:24, 9 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 90,658 bytes +6‎ →‎Background: It's not a combination. It's an anomaly. And that is a more neutral term than "pathology". We need to focus on exactly what happened, what references say happened and not mince words. It's anomalous behavior. undo
• curprev 00:1900:19, 9 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 90,652 bytes −1,074‎ Peltola got 1st or 2nd-choice votes from 52.2%. So she *did* get some support from the majority of voters. But the numbers nor the citations support that Begich lost because too many voters voted for him. undo
• curprev 00:0100:01, 9 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,726 bytes −30‎ More neutral language, and less technical undo

8 July 2024

• curprev 23:5723:57, 8 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,756 bytes +935‎ I added negative weight back in a brief thing, since it seems that other editors find it quite important to include. Also, saying that Peltola did not get majority support is a confusing technicality that readers may not understand. undo
• curprev 23:4523:45, 8 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 90,821 bytes −398‎ I think this can be framed as background, which is a common section in election articles. That way only the key info of the election and its outcome is in the lede, but all this other stuff is still (concisely) summarized in this section. I do think a mention of the negative weight thing is worthwhile, though I haven't added it back in this edit. Also, the future referendum is not a direct result of this election so it isn't notable for this page. undo
• curprev 23:4323:43, 8 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 91,219 bytes +49‎ More specific. undo
• curprev 23:3923:39, 8 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 91,170 bytes −1,660‎ Let's remove the non-monotonicity discussion now. I don't see directly where non-monotonicity was demonstrated in this election. undo
• curprev 23:3223:32, 8 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 92,830 bytes +1,507‎ Undid revision 1233415364 by Stormy160 (talk) I am abreast of the discussion. This election is historically noteworthy and that should not be swept under the rug. This is concise and takes comparatively little real-estate. undo Tag: Disambiguation links added
• curprev 23:1323:13, 8 July 2024‎ Stormy160 talk contribs‎ 91,323 bytes −1,471‎ I implore you to read the extensive discussion on the talk page with this one. Look how long the lede is in the two versions, there is a clear difference. Also, this page is about a specific election, NOT the merits of IRV. So stop treating this like a research paper and accept that it has to be a summary.Undid revision 1233415053 by 146.115.164.202 (talk) undo Tag: Undo
• curprev 23:1023:10, 8 July 2024‎ 146.115.164.202 talk‎ 92,794 bytes +1,471‎ Undid revision 1233414231 by Stormy160 (talk) No, it is not too long. It is accurate and supported by published research. You are demonstrating bias. undo Tags: Undo Reverted Disambiguation links added