Talk:Canadian electoral system

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

Canada: Governments High‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Governments of Canada.

Formatting

A lot of the text has been put in bold. It seems unnecessarily distracting to me, making it look a bit like a ransom note. Am I the only one who thinks so? HistoryBA 14:32, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and try your hand, gotta see different things to know what looks best.

Alot of writing is either in bold or italics, almost like its trying to stress a point. Whats up with that?--Trevorprella (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Can-pol w.jpg

Image:Can-pol w.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Election Date Update and Question Regarding NPOV of adding King-Bing affair to the page

There was some incoherency on the page regarding the new fixed election law and the constitutional rule requiring elections every five years. I got fairly well written information from the Elections_in_canada page. I also added information about the King-Bing affair [http:http://www.canadahistory.com/sections/documents/news/1926kingbing.htm] where the Governor General of the day (Byng actually, but it comes up under King-Bing everywhere) denied the Prime Minister an election and asked the next largest party if they form government which they did.

Question: Many thought that the Governor General was going to do the same thing last year when Harper asked for an election in September. In the end she didn't but it was a suspense. Is it to NPOV or POV to add this fact in (written up in a less POV wording)? I ask because I think with the increases in minority governments and (in my view) the fact that we will likely have quite a few of them over the next little while (although there may still be majority governments too) makes it relevant. Marcie (talk) 23:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who on Earth...

...copied this from EC's website? It refers to Elections Canada in the first person! 76.117.247.55 (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

== Candidate selection process

Being an American I'm not familiar enough with the process to start it up but this article needs some discussion of how parties go about selecting their candidates for office. AP (talk) 19:32, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Including proportionality in the turnout section

First, it's confusing to jump from turnout to proportionality.

Second, I'm not sure this really fits in this section. Of course disproportional could be one of the reasons turnout is lower, but that should be established before quoting statistics about it.

What do you think?

popular vote

It would be great to have a section explaining how, for example, in 2019 the liberals lost the popular vote but still came out ahead.I still don't quite get this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sara.koopman (talk • contribs) 21:48, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conservatives had alot of votes in some provinces and not enough in others. 1 vote in Alberta is worth less than 1 vote in Quebec as an example. Certain provinces are over represented in the government. It's not based on geographic size of area, it's not based on population, it just is what it is. Kav2001c (talk) 05:14, 5 March 2021 (UTC)kav2001c[reply]