Talk:2022 Barbadian general election

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Barbados (assessed as Mid-importance).

Elections and Referendums

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

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

Isnt the Popular Vote in the Infobox not for the entire country?[edit]

My change was reverted but I had thought the popular vote mentioned in infobox was the BLP votes for the entire country, not for Mia Mottley's constituency only. At least it seems to be for the entire country bed on past election articles Gemini.skywalker (talk) 15:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is meant to be the BLP vote for the entire country. However, the figure you added was not correct. As far as I can see, the total for the BLP is around 80,000 (although not entirely clear as the Nation News results have changed). Number 5 7 15:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well in that case It might be best to either wait for an article with a definitive number or the standard report from the Barbados Electoral and Boundaries commission. Gemini.skywalker (talk) 15:48, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid / Blank votes[edit]

Do we know how many of them were cast? If we add that data we could fill in the total of voters and thus get the turnout. --Aréat (talk) 15:54, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Nation News only has them for a few seats. May have to wait for the formal gazette... Number 5 7 18:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my edit but wouldn't the more likely case be that the seats that didn't report any not have any? Even the ones that did often only hnd single digit spoilt seats. @Number 57 AvalonXD (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think it's highly unlikely that numerous seats had no invalid votes. In the last elections, every single constituency had at least six invalid votes. Number 5 7 17:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of Parties[edit]

Although I agree that it is common wikipedia practice to not include parties that win no seats, parties that go from 1 to 0, gaining in between elections, are typically included. Take, for example, the 2008 Canadian federal election, in which the Greens are included, despite going from 0 seats in 2006 to 0 seats in 2008, as they gained a member through a defection during the course of the parliament or the 2020 United States House of Representatives elections, with the Libertarian Party. Parties that had no seats on dissolution and keep no seats are also included, as seen in the inclusion of the People's Party in the 2021 Canadian federal election. In the 2007 French legislative election, the National Front should not be included, as they went from 0 to 0, but they are. If the criteria is expanded to presidential elections, John B. Anderson should not be included in the 1980 United States presidential election, and Ross Perot should not be included in either the 1992 United States presidential election or the 1996 United States presidential election. Counter to this, the AfD is not included in the 2013 German federal election.

On a separate note, vote swing being included in the results infobox is just as divided by Wikipedia convention, as seen not being included in the 2021 German federal election, July 2021 Bulgarian parliamentary election, 2021 Bulgarian general election, 2021 Mexican legislative election, 2021 Dutch general election, 2017 French legislative election, 2019 Indian general election, and 2018 Italian general election, though included in the April 2021 Bulgarian parliamentary election, 2021 Canadian federal election, 2020 United States House of Representatives elections, 2019 Belgian federal election, November 2019 Spanish general election, and 2019 United Kingdom general election.

Regarding the two possible controversies, there seems to be no consensus on either, and whatever would best represent the political situation of the election should be included. In my opinion, including the APP is something that should be done, as they had a member upon dissolution, which is typically grounds for inclusion, though including the DLP is a different topic. Including the APP but not the DLP makes it seem as if the APP is the second party, which is not true in terms of votes, though including them lacks grounds other than that. AnOpenBook (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the claim that such parties are typically included; there may be some examples where they are, but I would say that in most cases, this is not true (I am not really familiar with conventions on American/Canadian election articles, but I regularly edit election articles on all but ten or so countries, and this is from my experience from the others). Given the APP were far behind the DLP in the vote share, it would be bizarre to include them and not the DLP, so the best solution is simply to exclude both IMO.

As a side-note, the presidential election comparisons are irrelevant, as there is a specific convention that candidates with over 5% of the vote are included. Number 5 7 22:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, please disregard the presidential elections from the list, as I was unaware of that convention; thank you for bringing it to my attention. My main goal with adding all of the elections was to show that there were examples for both sides, but my surface level searching could only find the German election as an example. This can easily be attributed to the fact that it is easier to find the inclusion of something rather than its exclusion, but my intent was not to try and paint a picture of a precedent leading towards one side or the other. You definitely have more experience, and I defer to your judgement on this; my goal was not to challenge what is in the article, but to show examples of both options. AnOpenBook (talk) 03:47, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]