Talk:2022 United States House of Representatives elections

Is a FEC filing equivalent to declaring candidacy?

I see that someone added candidates who have filed with the FCC in each race, but I'm not sure whether that's tantamount to formally declaring candidacy, as many individuals often file but never run. Do we usually rely on FEC filings, or is it better to use other secondary sources? --WMSR (talk) 21:42, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

For now, I think the FEC candidacy statement is the best preliminary source. --69.121.243.76 (talk) 21:40, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

The filing of the FEC Statement of Candidacy, as well as the filing of the FEC Statement of Organization should be sufficient. Endqualifiedimmunity (talk) 23:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

If someone files with the FEC, it is equivalent to simply filing the necessary paperwork. It is by no means a declaration of candidacy. A good example is David Perdue, who filed to run for U.S. Senate, but decided to not run. Ltothel (talk) 00:49, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Minnesota’s 1st

Need a source on Rep. Jim Hagedorn’s Independent challenger. Also need source to determine if “Independant” is a typo or a party the candidate filed for. --69.121.243.76 (talk) 21:41, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Vacancies

Should the retirements section be changed to vacancies to account for other types of vacancies besides retirements or am I just over thinking things? Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 13:48, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Never mind! I saw how the 2020 page was done and they have deaths listed under Special Elections and Resignations listed under a separate category Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 13:50, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Map

Could someone please make a map with retirements and incumbents. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Here’s one (Maybe fix up the colors, then take a screenshot, and of course, maps are to be redrawn): https://www.yapms.com/app/?m=9hga Muhibm0307 (talk) 04:15, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Reapportionment edit

I believe that S1 (For the People Act) has provisions that would ban partisan gerrymandering and put the redistricting process in the government. Does it make sense to put that information in the article, especially if it means the elections will be affected by this cycle because of it? I'm curious. Thanks in advance for the response. Losipov (talk) 21:56, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Texas 7 Congressional Candidate

Can someone fix my citation for Wesley Hunt? I'm not sure the proper format so I've been copying other citations with the appropriate info, apparently it has resulted in a dead link Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 05:41, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Fixed. I reckon it is a dead URL because somehow the URL in the citation you added uses the Google domain name which went nowhere. Next time, please edit the URL so that the news website becomes the domain name, eg. https://www.google.com/s/abc13.com/republican-wesley-hunt-congress-2022-election-democrat-lizzie-fletcher/10868449/ => https://abc13.com/republican-wesley-hunt-congress-2022-election-democrat-lizzie-fletcher/10868449/. Also, you shouldn't include the candidate's campaign website as a citation, including when a reliable source you added already verified their candidacy, per editnotice. —twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 00:18, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I only added the campaign website because this one jack ass editor would have been likely to block my editing privileges because of the dead link. I was just covering my base Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 01:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Invitation to a RfC on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums

Hi everyone, I would like to invite y'all to a RfC started by me about RfC: Convention for House of Representatives special elections in the United States which is related to a section of this article. Please leave your suggestions if you're inclined to. Thanks! ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 12:43, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Retirement

idk how else to say this but I think we should create a sortable wikitable or the retirements anyone disagree if so please tell me why Cookiemonstericecream (talk) 18:02, 9 August 2021 (UTC) seeing no objection i will proceed Cookiemonstericecream (talk) 15:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

page structuring

Is it worthwhile perhaps for a chart to be made with all the states PVI and predictions together to get a better feel collectively of each parties standing in regard to majority of seats without counting each of the districts from each state? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.199.73 (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Iowa

Iowa has released their new maps and Ashley Hinson is running for re-election in the new 2nd District, Marinette Miller Meeks is now located in the 3rd district, and the 1st district has no incumbent. I have no idea how to fix this to show Miller Meeks and Axne in the same district Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 00:39, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Nunes

Nunes isn't Retiring!

He is resigning at the end of the month!

He won't be the Incumbent in November, so he doesn't technically count as a Retirement! Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 01:56, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Is There a Guarantee That California 22 Will Have a Special Election?

When Republican Duncan Hunter resigned on January 13, 2020, Governor Newsom did not call a special election. He let the seat be vacant until the current Congress. Do we know that Newsom won't let Nunes' seat be vacant for that long? EvanJ35 (talk) 16:26, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

@EvanJ35: This article says, California must hold a special election. Maybe in Hunter's case, Newsom could decide differently because he resigned in the election year while Nunes will resign in 2021? Just speculating. This only says "Based on the timing of the resignation, a special election will not be called" which might also allude to the fact that the primaries for the normal election were already under way. Regards SoWhy 16:50, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Politics1

(Courtesy ping) @Zenmaster190 and FellowMellow: I know that Politics1 has sometimes been used as a source for candidacies in future U.S. election articles. However, regardless of your opinion on its reliability, I believe we should draw attention to its FAQ page question no. 4 which states that an "Active Candidate" also includes those who have only filed paperwork or publicly expressed interest. Because Wikipedia's list on declared candidates usually only include those who have explicitly declared that they will actually run, especially this article which has no list for potential candidates, Politics1 thus should not be used as a source for declared candidacies and should not generally be used for this article, I think. —twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 03:19, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Politics1 keeps track of which candidates have declared their candidacies. Therefore I think that it should be used. Thomascampbell123 (talk) 03:53, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

To be clear, this is not about the source being unreliable. This is about a source containing one thing, ie. a broad list of "active" or, looking at the website's own FAQ ("an 'active' candidate includes anyone who has publicly announced their intention to seek the office and anyone who has filed papers to form a committee and/or raise money for a possible bid the office"), moreso "publicly expressed interest" – and then the source is used to cite another crucially different thing, ie. a much more narrowly defined list of those who have actually declared their candidacies. I don't think the source itself actually tracks explicitly declared candidates, only those "active" and potential candidates. TL;DR: this is more an issue of instead of . —twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 13:26, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Virginia

The VA Supreme Court approved the new districts Dickeyaustin786 (talk) 02:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Primary dates

These are not mentioned yet. If they are known, they should be added to the page.

216.138.61.221 (talk) 04:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Notability of politicians

If a politician is one of two primary politicians for US Congress in 2022. W2, who has had articles written about him with all large state papers in past elections, does that make this candidate notable?

What policy can I look up about this? Quiet2 (talk) 03:35, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Redistricted retiring incumbents

Should redistricted incumbents who are retiring be listed with their current districts or their new districts? For example, David Price currently serves in NC-04 and is listed as such in the “retiring incumbents” section but he’s technically being redistricted to NC-06. Hotpotato1234567890 (talk) 23:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Map colors

I think that new districts or districts without an incumbent should have a light gray colour, rather than blue or red.

Splitting Article Tag

Hi all, the cleanup tag stating that is article is too long was placed by User:Onetwothreeip in late January, but there's been no subsequent discussion. I'm starting this discussion here so we can either split the article or remove the tag. In my opinion, this article follows the standard format of 2020 United States House of Representatives elections and 2018 United States House of Representatives elections, and I'm not sure what would be split. What are other editor's thoughts on this? Wildfire35 (talk) 01:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Far too much detail on the election in each seat, which can be moved to the election articles for each state. Instead we can provide a brief summary per state in this article, saying how many Democrats and how many Republicans are defending seats in each state. I'm not aware of any other election Wikipedia covers where the candidates and results for each contested seat are in the main election article. Onetwothreeip (talk) 06:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi all, just wanted to add that I think this article is one of the best lists of declared candidates for office in the United States publicly available and splitting it may make it a less helpful resource. That being said, it is very long. I'd be opposed to changes to the state sections, but splitting the apportionment section out entirely may help with article length. --TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi TulsaPoliticsFan, thank you for your comment! The reapportionemnt section has already been split out to 2020 United States redistricting cycle already, the small summary remaining is necessary per Wikipedia's splitting guide. Onetwothreeip while this may not be how other election articles are structured, all of the US House Election pages on Wikipedia dating back to at least 2010 (and probably farther) have been structured this way, so I'm worried that making such a drastic change and removing large swaths of content from only this election article could be confusing. Wildfire35 (talk) 22:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I would support moving the content to the articles for each stats not only for the 2022 article, but the other articles we have as well. They are all similarly too large. Onetwothreeip (talk) 23:02, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Wonky footnotes

Does anyone know why the footnotes are wonky from footnote 1007 to 1050 and/or can fix them? Kaltenmeyer (talk) 04:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea. Perhaps, because the article is too large, it can't load all of the citations. —twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 05:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

According to the following link, this page has exceeded Post-expand include size, breaking a number of the templates. Is the only option to split it, or does someone who is familiar with templates know how to fix this? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=categorymembers&cmtitle=Category%3APages+where+post-expand+include+size+is+exceeded&cmprop=title%7Ctimestamp&cmlimit=500&cmsort=timestamp&cmdir=desc&format=xml Wildfire35 (talk) 02:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm all for reliable sourcing, but does the article really need five times more citations than 2018 United States House of Representatives elections? Certes (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

The 2018 article is on the large side at 353,191 bytes and 220 sources. This article, at 569,050 bytes and 1063 sources is breaking at the seams. What's different between 2018 and this year? More candidates running? – wbm1058 (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Actually the problem is that it's still primary season. This same issue happened twofour years ago, indeed then all the references were broken! Only after the losers in the primaries are culled out the the article does it reduce down to a reasonable size. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Interesting. If such detailed analysis won't be kept after the primaries, should we carry it now? (I realise that trimming the losers before the results are known would be rather difficult.) Certes (talk) 19:58, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

The problem was avoided two years ago, although someone did plant a {{very long}} at the top of the article. I think the solution was only putting a single citation for the entire candidates column in the column heading, as was done for California, rather than have a citation in each individual candidate's box. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Switching citations from templates to plain text may also help. CMD (talk) 04:15, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I've fixed it for now using the stopgap replacement suggested at WP:Village pump (technical)#Effect of article size on references (and of transclusions on article size)?

Replaced all {{cite web with {{#invoke:cite web| – if or when the article is reduced in length by culling some content, this change may be reversed.

When in Show preview mode, look at the bottom of the page for the Parser profiling data (you may need to click the arrow to expand this)

Post-expand include size is currently 2,036,509 bytes; the maximum allowed is 2,097,152 bytes, so we still don't have much headroom. The first thing to go when the limit is exceeded will be the large "navigation box" at the bottom of the article. – wbm1058 (talk) 01:03, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Could some of this be fixed by keeping just official Secretary of State filings as sources? For instance, TX and KY only have the SoS filings as sources, since it is after their filing deadlines. However, OR, CO, NE, MD, and others have both web articles and SoS filings as their filing periods are ongoing. Could we remove the web articles for candidates that have filed and then switch the remaining web articles when the remaining candidates officially file? Sorry if this is confusing Hotpotato1234567890 (talk) 01:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Hotpotato1234567890 That's actually how I began handling filing periods back in Nov/Dec when TX began filings. However, I switched over to the dual web/SoS citing method as a compromise after a user noted that SoS filings are considered primary sources by themselves - and this (as you mentioned) has been the unspoken default since. I will note again, as others have mentioned, the article size will naturally cull down with primaries beginning soon (ex. TX's primaries will eliminate a whole swath of candidates next Tues). Ultimately though, I still personally see no problem with removing web articles for filed candidates as a principle, and I think it's something that merits further discussion.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenmaster190 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

The size of this article may come down later, but it is barely editable on mobile as it is now. ActivelyDisinterested (talk) 17:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

FL District 2

Florida District 2 candidate Linda Brooks is listed here as a Democrat, but on her campaign website she states that she is running as an Independent. I'm guessing there was a mix-up by whoever wrote the article currently listed as a citation. --75.112.177.131 (talk) 04:54, 4 March 2022 (UTC)