This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovenia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Slovenia 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.
Tagging the section for inaccuracy of the numbers entered in the table that are completely different from the linked sources presented in the table. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Example one: The "22–25 Jun" survey entered in the table states that SMC is in the lead, while the provided source clearly states that SDS is the favored party with SMC behind it. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:24, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Please try reading the sources. Here is a direct quote from the source explaining this:
Neopredeljene anketirance je agencija vprašala tudi po njihovih političnih preferencah. Če bi njihove glasove prišteli opredeljenim in bi od tega odšteli volivce, ki se glasovanja zagotovo ne bi udeležili, bi se zaporedje strank nekoliko spremenilo. Na prvem mestu bi pristala Stranka Mira Cerarja z 31,2 odstotka glasov, na drugem SDS z 29,5 odstotka, na tretjem pa SD z 8,7 odstotka glasov.
Stranka DeSUS bi prejela 7,2 odstotka glasov, NSi 6,5 odstotka, PS 3,8 odstotka, Zavezništvo Alenke Bratušek pa 3,6 odstotka glasov. Sledijo SLS s tremi odstotki, Združena levica z 2,6 odstotka, Verjamem z 1,1 odstotka ter DL z 0,9 odstotka.
The undecided don't count as valid opinions on the popularity of election candidates, therefore those numbers are 100% wrong. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 16:45, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
That is original research. First you claimed the numbers weren't in the source. They obviously were. Now you're ignoring them, and what the source says, and insisting the pollsters methods are bad. You're entitled to that opinion, but it is simply a personal opinion and isn't a basis for the disputed section tag. --4idaho (talk) 17:32, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
The source's title says SDS is in the lead, your numbers say SMC is in the lead. Also, you are clearly trolling here. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:54, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Again, if you read the actual source it clearly says that's the raw first preference data, and after undecided voters are allocated SMC is in the lead. Also, the table explicitly explains this if you read the notes. So even if you disagree, it's clearly not a basis for a section disputed template, since clearly everything in the section is sourced. --4idaho (talk) 20:37, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
You are wrong. The source states that the survey shows SDS to be leading the opinion polls, with SMC behind it. The numbers that you have added to the Opinion polls table are the numbers that the source cites as undecided, therefore YOUR Opinion polls table is misleading and incorrect. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
You are completely failing to read what the source says, and failing to read what the article says. Go actually read what the source says. The source is only three paragraphs long, and explains this perfectly clearly. They are the same set of numbers. One is the raw first preferences, that is including undecided and abstaining voters as percentages of the total. The data used in the table, and as is explained perfectly clearly in the source, is the same poll after excluding abstaining voters and asking undecided voters if they're leaning towards a particular party. After allocating these "leaners" (in pollster lingo) SMC is ahead.
It is also clearly explained in the opinion polling section that the results in the table are the results after the allocation of undecided voters. There is nothing factually disputable, and you clearly don't understand what the template is used for. --4idaho (talk) 00:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
And herein lies the issue: the results after the allocation of undecided voters are not relevant to the Opinion polls table. Only the results of the decided voters are relevant to the case. Anything else is gossip and speculation that don't belong on Wikipedia. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 01:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I fail to understand why you think a perfectly normal polling technique is "gossip." There's no such thing as an undecided vote on election day. "Undecided voters" either pick a party or stay home; that's why many pollsters ask if they're leaning a particular direction, to help indicate how they're going to vote. Many pollsters do this. Including Ninamedia, the one in question. You may or may not agree with their methods, but that's just a personal opinion and it's not the correct way to use the template. --4idaho (talk) 03:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
I have fully protected the article due to the continued edit warring (I assume Witty Bastard is an account created by 18.104.22.168 so that he could edit semi-protected pages). In the meantime I have reverted to the stable version without the tag.
Please discuss the issue here and gain consensus for any changes to the article. Thanks, Number57 15:21, 1 July 2014 (UTC)