Talk:2018 Taiwanese referendum

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Taiwan Mid‑importance

	Taiwan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taiwan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Taiwan 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.TaiwanWikipedia:WikiProject TaiwanTemplate:WikiProject TaiwanTaiwan articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles

Plural?

So, is it several referendums, or one multi-question referendum?--Aréat (talk) 16:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a single referendum with multiple questions on different topics. I had been toying with the idea of moving it to Taiwanese referendum, 2018 as usually "referendums" in the title is reserved for multiple referendums on different dates during a year (compare Swiss referendum, 1875 (two separate questions on the same day) with Swiss referendums, 1876 (different questions on different dates). Number 5 7 16:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was thinking as well. If there's no indication of the questions still being proceeded being maybe held on a later date, I think the page should be renamed. Cordially. --Aréat (talk) 16:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. It looks odd and is slightly confusing.--Batmacumba (talk) 16:58, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've moved it. Cheers, Number 5 7 17:56, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quorum

We have conflicting sources saying for some that 25 % of the registered voters casting a yes vote is needed while others state that it is simply a 25 % turnout quorum. Do anyone know which one it is? I can't seem to find further english or french source on this matter.--Aréat (talk) 18:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I finally found it. According to article 29 of the referendum law 1, it is indeed a quorum of 25 % of the registered voters casting a positive vote. All these newspapers talking of a turnout quorum are wrong.--Aréat (talk) 22:42, 27 October 2018 (UTC)--Aréat (talk) 22:41, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Translation

Unless there's a translation from official or established sources, I don't think original translation should be used. Does anybody have a source for these translation? Big Wang (talk) 01:31, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What translation? --Aréat (talk) 05:33, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I found some government sources that contained the English translation for the various ballot initiatives, so we are good here. Big Wang (talk) 10:57, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Result table blurbs

The short blurbs in the result table are not exactly representative. For example, "Restricting marriage to one man and woman" doesn't really restrict it wholesale, but only in the civil law. "Not implementing Gender Equality Education Act" doesn't actually say not implementing gender equality education act, but rather the content in the act specific about homosexuality. We should probably just use the reference numbers of the referendum instead of trying to write our own summaries Big Wang (talk) 03:58, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree on using just numbers. It reduce readability a lot, with users endng up having to go back and forth between section to know which result correspond to which matter. Having short sentences doesn't deform the table and the full explanation are in the article anyways. If anything, modify the sentences if you think they're misleading, but please keep them concises. Cordially. --Aréat (talk) 06:04, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In previous articles we've just used the question number, but I think here there are too many to make it pratical as readers will have to keep switching between the lists of proposals and results tables to match them up. I'd echo what Aréat says and try and reword the blurb in the results tables if there are any concerns. Number 5 7 13:55, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]