Talk:2020 United States presidential election: Difference between revisions
m →Separate page for minor parties?: proofreading. my comments |
→Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2019: new section |
||
Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
::::I think the current requirements are reasonable, perhaps a few candidates may be removed but culling everyone who is not notable does not seem right, I don’t think it’s fair to give, say, Kim Ruff’s campaign for the nomination of the Libertarian Party less weight than Vermin Supreme’s just because he has a page and she does not. [[User:Devonian Wombat|Devonian Wombat]] 01:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC) [[User:Devonian Wombat|Devonian Wombat]] ([[User talk:Devonian Wombat|talk]]) 01:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC) |
::::I think the current requirements are reasonable, perhaps a few candidates may be removed but culling everyone who is not notable does not seem right, I don’t think it’s fair to give, say, Kim Ruff’s campaign for the nomination of the Libertarian Party less weight than Vermin Supreme’s just because he has a page and she does not. [[User:Devonian Wombat|Devonian Wombat]] 01:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC) [[User:Devonian Wombat|Devonian Wombat]] ([[User talk:Devonian Wombat|talk]]) 01:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC) |
||
== Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2019 == |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|2020 United States presidential election|answered=no}} |
|||
My request is that Andrew Yang's photo gets updated. I noticed that many 2020 candidates got updated photos, but he didn't. [[Special:Contributions/66.190.209.69|66.190.209.69]] ([[User talk:66.190.209.69|talk]]) 00:10, 13 October 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:10, 13 October 2019
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2020 United States presidential election article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30Auto-archiving period: 15 days ![]() |
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Template:WikiProject Donald Trump
|
![]() | 2020 United States presidential election was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Consensuses reached for the 2012 and 2016 elections apply for the 2020 election as well, unless these consensuses are reversed. Regarding the infobox: A consensus has been reached to make it so that the political parties that earned at least one electoral vote in the previous election are to, by default, be included in the infobox of the article about the next election This means that, as of right now, only the Republican and Democratic parties are to be included in the infobox. In order for a third party to be included, they need to have ballot acces in the 2020 election to at least 270 electoral votes, per this consensus. |
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2020 United States presidential election article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30Auto-archiving period: 15 days ![]() |
Revert of Darcy Richardson entry
@David O. Johnson: I vehemently oppose you reverting the page back to blanking Richardson's section. As a bare minimum, the title should be amended to "Withdrawn candidate," not just blanked outright. If I wasn't editing on my phone, I would do it myself. Additionally, the source that you and Liberaltarian12345 linked to in your respective edit summaries here and here is a source that has long been considered to be unreliable per established consensus at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive 125#The "Independent Political Report", and I wasn't able to find an additional source to suggest otherwise. That's why I reverted Liberaltarian12345's edit in the first place. OhKayeSierra (talk) 00:40, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
- Not to mention that your "source" is an article comment, as opposed to an article itself. OhKayeSierra (talk) 00:45, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
- @David O. Johnson: Since it's been a few hours without a response, I went ahead and reverted your changes and amended the table accordingly. I opted to keep this as the citation, although I did tag it as unreliable. OhKayeSierra (talk) 04:34, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
Separate page for minor parties?
Would it make sense to move the possible candidates for parties with too little ballot access for electing a president to a separate page, and just list those parties with a link to their respetive page on here to make the article more concise? TheFIST (talk) 16:14, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, it would make a lot of sense. In fact, I'm pretty sure that was the standard previously - to include on only the third-parties and independent candidates that have secured enough state ballots to have at least a mathematical possibility of getting the minimum number of electoral votes needed to win the election. Not sure when or why we got away from that. Previously, there was a separate page for the 2020 3rd party and independent candidates (as there have been for recent past elections) but it got redirected to this page. Now this page is getting over-long and unwieldy. So I definitely agree that it's time to restore the separate page as suggested by the OP. ---A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 22:49, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Lincoln Chafee
Chafee is running for Libertarian nomination. [1] JJARichardson (talk) 21:23, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
I searched it up and couldn't find any other sources. I find it odd that a former senator and governor announcing a presidential bid would not be covered in the news. Unless we can find another source to confirm, I think we should hold off on adding him.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 03:26, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Wayne Messam
I would like to gauge consensus for a merge at Talk:Wayne Messam. Messam has never participated in a televised debate and he has never beat 1% in a national poll. He is not included as a major candidate by FiveThirtyEight.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 03:19, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Excessive listing of non-notable people
Whatever happened to the requirement that candidates must be notable to be listed? We've got a huge WP:UNDUE weight problem with the transclusion of candidate lists at 2020_United_States_presidential_election#Libertarian_Party, 2020_United_States_presidential_election#Green_Party, and [[2020_United_States_presidential_election#Other nominations: that's 27 people with big table rows, 14 of which are true nobodies without Wikipedia articles, and none of which have gotten any modicum of media coverage with sources being just their own websites and FEC filing. These need to go rather than take up half the article. I have removed the even worse withdrawn and speculative "candidates" to start. Reywas92Talk 22:42, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
- I am not an expert on the relevant Wikipedia policies that govern pages covering political subjects such as these presidential elections. But my personal opinion on this is that if someone has qualified to be listed as a candidate at any point, then the fact that they are in the running at all for the highest political office in the United States means that their campaigns are significant. And since Wikipedia is also by its very nature not censored, if there is significant coverage of these individuals to the point where they were originally listed on this page in any capacity, it should not be the prerogative of a single independent editor to unilaterally remove this information without first seeking consensus to support that action. For that reason, I am reverting your unilateral removal of material on this page, and based on Wikipedia policies about consensus and reliable sourcing, those entries should not be removed again unless and until the consensus concurs with that action in this matter. Thank you. --Jgstokes (talk) 03:13, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- No, there was never significant coverage of these individuals. We actually do have a consensus on this matter, which requires multiple sources independent of the subject covering them. They were listed in the Libertarian subpage but not here originally. It is not censorship to establish that Wikipedia has a standard that one must have media coverage of a campaign to be listed, and these people do not have that. Merely filing with the FEC does not mean that your so-called campaign is significant. Moreso, the sections I removed are not of the people actually running, rather the people who aren't running! In their case, none of your statement holds, since none of them are actually involved in this election! We rely on independent sources, while these are sources only to their personal websites and Facebook pages. Reywas92Talk 05:41, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- I fully agree with Reywas92. I'm Ok with some non-notable candidates being included on the sub-articles (within reasonable parameters) but the main article should have higher standards.---A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 22:48, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- No, there was never significant coverage of these individuals. We actually do have a consensus on this matter, which requires multiple sources independent of the subject covering them. They were listed in the Libertarian subpage but not here originally. It is not censorship to establish that Wikipedia has a standard that one must have media coverage of a campaign to be listed, and these people do not have that. Merely filing with the FEC does not mean that your so-called campaign is significant. Moreso, the sections I removed are not of the people actually running, rather the people who aren't running! In their case, none of your statement holds, since none of them are actually involved in this election! We rely on independent sources, while these are sources only to their personal websites and Facebook pages. Reywas92Talk 05:41, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- I think the current requirements are reasonable, perhaps a few candidates may be removed but culling everyone who is not notable does not seem right, I don’t think it’s fair to give, say, Kim Ruff’s campaign for the nomination of the Libertarian Party less weight than Vermin Supreme’s just because he has a page and she does not. Devonian Wombat 01:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC) Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2019
![]() | It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at 2020 United States presidential election. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
My request is that Andrew Yang's photo gets updated. I noticed that many 2020 candidates got updated photos, but he didn't. 66.190.209.69 (talk) 00:10, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- Unassessed Elections and Referendums articles
- WikiProject Elections and Referendums articles
- Unassessed politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- Unassessed American politics articles
- Top-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- Unassessed United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- Unassessed United States articles of Mid-importance
- Unassessed United States presidential elections articles
- Mid-importance United States presidential elections articles
- WikiProject United States presidential elections articles
- Unassessed United States Government articles
- High-importance United States Government articles
- WikiProject United States Government articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- Former good article nominees
- Wikipedia Did you know articles
- Wikipedia articles that use American English
- Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests