User talk:Valenciano/Archive 10

Sanyam Goel

If you tag a new page for deletion or cleanup, like you did with Sanyam Goel, please make sure it is mark as reviewed. Thanks. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 09:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I dream of horses, will do, sorry about that, the twinkle module usually does that, but don't know why it didn't on this occasion. Valenciano (talk) 10:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Metrovalencia request

Valenciano, I have a request – is there any chance you can add a column for "Year opened" to the 'Lines' table at the Metrovalencia article? It would help me, and I suspect other readers, if it was clearer when certain lines on Metrovalencia were put in to service... Thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

IJBall, that's done. I'll be out most of today but I'll have a look when I can and try and find a ref for the lines length. I also wouldn't mind having a go at updating List of Valencia, Spain metro stations, but I'm not totally sure of the coding to make the lines display correctly. Valenciano (talk) 09:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I know where the line lengths are (it's in the same ref I added last night...), so I'll ref those (and fix them) today. If I were to do the list of stations page, I'd probably have to rewrite it from scratch – I can do that, but it will probably be at least a week before I can get to a project that big(!)... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Revisiting: List of Metrovalencia stations

Valenciano: OK, it took me quite a while to get to it, and then I think took me almost another week to work up and finish, but I have finally replaced the very weird old "route map"-format stations list at the List of Metrovalencia stations (which I was able to move from it's previous non-standard List of Valencia, Spain metro stations article name) with an new, updated proper list-table of stations, which is also more informative than the old one.

A couple of points, though - the official figures from Metrovalencia states there are 137 stations total in the Metrovalencia system, but I only count 134 stations in my table (and I tried to match that up with the system map, and I could swear that I didn't miss any stations!...). Also, the official figures from Metrovalencia states that there are 35 underground stations, but I only count 34 in the table – it could be that the map at UrbanRail.net that I used is missing an underground station in the outlying areas.

Anyway, at least the table is set up now, so you can "fix" any errors you come across. On my end, this project is mostly done, though I may replace the List of Metrovalencia stations' current "Legend' with something more like the 'Legend' at List of Milan Metro stations... Let me know if you have any further thoughts or suggestions! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

IJBall, the discrepancy in the station numbers is a bit weird. I looked through it and did spot checks on the bits where the metro bits go overground, but all the stations seem to be there. I made a few changes and added notes on changes of station name and so on. Good work on that. Valenciano (talk) 10:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Sign up now

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Deleting talk page comments

I notice you didn't give Scolaire a warning when he deleted talk page comments. It seems to be a rule applied only to one side in the dispute. Your project is pathetic. Text Julian (talk) 23:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Text Julian, when you answer my question I'll answer yours. I'll repeat it: "Your only contributions are to the Derry page and it's fairly unusual for a new user to find their way straight to a contentious discussion. It's pretty unheard of for an account that's genuinely new to know about sandboxes, signing their contributions, article talk pages and indenting their comments, as well as Wikipedia concepts like "consensus" and "common name" yet, in just 6 edits, you've demonstrated all those skills. So what previous account did you edit under?" Valenciano (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Valenciano you're not the wikipedia police. I've noticed that everybody who enters this discussion on the official name side, such as Dubs boy, Goodday, myself, ends up being accused of being topic banned or sockpuppeting. Are you incapable of presenting a rational argument as to why we shouldn't use the official name? Your colleague Scolaire seems to be capable only of remwving talk page comments. You yourself said that this is not normal, but you don't seem to mind when Scolaire does it. And by the way, operating Wikipedia is easy and self explanatory. Don't read too much into whether or not mistakes have been made. I'm computer literate. How many mistakes did you make in your first few edits? Text Julian (talk) 09:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Good Day has been the subject of topic bans and is the subject of active arbitration remedies, Dubs boy has been blocked in the past for sock puppetry so those are not accusations, they're statements of fact. I've made rational arguments many times over the years on that subject (check the page archives) and I'm getting bored of repeating them when Dubs Boy raises the topic every single month, which is bordering on disruptive. I made lots of mistakes in my early edits, as does virtually every new Wikipedia editor, so the fact that within 6 edits you are not only perfectly versed in Wikipedia markup but also know Wikipedia terminology such as commonname and consensus means I don't believe for one second that you're a new editor. Valenciano (talk) 09:42, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

hmmm, I wasn't actually blocked for sock puppetry. I was banned for breaching a troubles restriction.Dubs boy (talk) 16:01, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you were blocked for that. You were " blocked from editing for a period of 4 months for Block evasion" i.e. sockpuppetry. Valenciano (talk) 18:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I was banned for breaching a troubles restriction, even though I only edited on talk pages and unknowingly evaded a block. If only I had 9 lives like other users.Dubs boy (talk) 19:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Wait, you're "computer literate" so know about things like fairly obscure policies, sandboxes, joining talk page discussions, etc. - yet aren't computer literate enough to click on the big, obvious, "Forgot your password?" button when you forget your password? Something is indeed a bit off... Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 22:50, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Manchester United F.C.

I assume you're referring to this comma: "Manchester United Football Club is a professional football club based in Old Trafford, Greater Manchester, England, that plays in the Premier League." That comma is only there to indicate the subordinate nature of "Greater Manchester, England" in indicating the location of Old Trafford. It does not imply any relativism between the clauses preceding and succeeding it. – PeeJay 20:46, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

PeeJay2K3, I'd totally disagree. From Oxford dictionaries: "A non-restrictive relative clause (also called a non-defining relative clause) provides extra information that could be left out without affecting the meaning or structure of the sentence." The part about them being a Premier League team *is* a non-defining relative clause. It adds extra info which is not necessary for identifying the subject, in this case the team (there is no other professional football club based in Old Trafford.) There should not be a comma before "that" and the word "that" can't be used in this type of clause anyway, "which" should be used instead. Valenciano (talk) 12:26, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Aaron Harrison

I don't recall editing that article. Can you inform me of what changes were made? I will say that most of my edits are to correct poor grammar, so it's not outside realm of possibility.

The contributions of your ip show edits to that article. If that wasn't you, then it's better to register for an account to avoid such confusion. Valenciano (talk) 20:41, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Kaleem rahi

Deleted it, salted both it and the parent. That should take care of it. Could you take a look and confirm, please? I've never salted before - just want to make sure it went OK. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 08:43, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Ser Amantio di Nicolao Yes, that's fine. Thanks. Valenciano (talk) 08:45, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Any time. Always happy to be of help. Happy editing! --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 08:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Incidentally, I see you're the one responsible for the creation of the article on Čili. I was just in the Baltics a couple of weeks ago, and made a point to eat at one on the basis of having read your article. Good decision it was, too...so thanks. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 08:58, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Haha, glad to be of service! :) Valenciano (talk) 08:59, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Re Gaza Strip

Okay. I didn't give an edit summary (because reading the diff showed that the content reintroduced was challenged, WP:OR, or unverified. I revert crap editing like that at sight,

Before reverting me at Gaza Strip did you look at the sources, or the page, where three of the sources (a) are under challenge as unreliable or unverifiable (a) Israel supplies the Gaza Strip with electricity, water, food, medicine, and all non-military items free of charge.[22][unreliable source][23][unreliable source][24][not in citation given]

and at (b) we have this extraordinary assertion (b) Due to the abundance of free foods coming into Gaza Strip from Israel, Palestinians are listed as the 8th most obese in the world among men and 3rd most obese among women.[25][26]

Political Arena doesn't mention the Gaza Strip. The Economist does but doesn't mention that this is due to the abundance of free food from Israel. You don't need to know the details of Israel's historical basic survival diet calculations for imports to see that that edit by a newvie was nonsense.Nishidani (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@Nishidani, I did look at the sources and don't understand what's particularly unreliable about The Washington Post (or Volokh conspiracy if you like) or BBC News. I'll grant your point about b) as that's pure WP:SYNTH. However, I don't edit articles about that conflict and I only came across your edits through recent changes patrol and to avoid that happening again, I'd strongly advise you to use edit summaries so that people unfamiliar with the articles can know what your motivations are, otherwise there's a chance you will be reverted like that. "Removed disputed section - see talk" would be fine. All the best with your editing. Valenciano (talk) 21:17, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not vandalism

It was his user page. He can do whatever he wants with it --222.158.40.25 (talk) 20:52, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:UP#POLEMIC, he can't have what he wants on it, especially "X is the gayest person in the Universe." He forfeited the right to decide what he had on Wikipedia when he engaged in vandalism here. Also, he's blocked so why are you so bothered about having this obviously unencyclopedic user page unless you are related in some way? Valenciano (talk) 21:08, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Also, based on your contributions, I think you and RyanBurns are one and the same. Valenciano (talk) 21:34, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

vandalism

campeon1914 did the same also in PAOK BC article Greco22 (talk) 15:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Reserve Requirements

What does reserve requirements are a myth mean? They are not. There really are reserve requirements. You are confused. Go read an economics textbook.

Thanks for the advice, but the issue there is that you're removing sourced content and Wikipedia covers all points of view, whether we agree with them or not. Valenciano (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Cheers. But there is only one point of view on money creation. There is no debate - can't be. So if I find sources that "prove" money is dropped by storks it can added as an "alternative view"?? You are abusing NPOV. 94.1.254.207 (talk) 17:35, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

No, it means that we can add all alternative views which are covered in reliable sources as this one is and removing it is contrary to our WP:NOTCENSORED policy. The last section you've added is non encyclopedic, consisting of your views, prefaced with comments like "you'll note that" which are more suitable to a blog. Either way, you've been reverted, so per WP:BRD you should use the article's talk page to discuss such changes rather than attempt to edit war them back in. Valenciano (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Last use of capital punishment in Spain

Hello! Your submission of Last use of capital punishment in Spain at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Yoninah, I've trimmed the hook down to acceptable length. Let me know if that's ok. Valenciano (talk) 00:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I objected this deletion attempt by that certain user

Admin,

Can you prevent the page i created below from being deleted ? I was new to Wiki, and also this is my first article ( technically ). I dont see any problem about this article below , i stated a legit fact as Citation and such. You can see and visit the page, would you mind to do that and prevent this page from being deleted ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_best-selling_boy_bands_in_Asia — Preceding unsigned comment added by MugenDarkness (talk • contribs) 04:49, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but even if I were, it wouldn't be possible to prevent pages from getting deleted if there was consensus to do so among other users. In this case, you should present your arguments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the best-selling boy bands in Asia. Valenciano (talk) 10:12, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Avenida de Blasco Ibañez

Hi Valenciano, seeing your interest in Valencia I thought that you might be interested in the page Avenida de Blasco Ibañez I just created. It's ofcourse somewhat different from your regular topics, but I was hoping you might have an image with more of an overview of the avenida. Greetings, Crispulop (talk) 21:25, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Weirdly, out of thousands of Valencia photos I have, I can't seem to find a single one of the Avenue itself which could be used. I have ones of me or various other people, especially near the football stadium, but I can't even trim those enough to be useful. I should be there later in the year or could get someone to do it, but it might take a while. Valenciano (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for having a look in your archive. I couldn't find any useable image in my archive either, nor on Flickr. Hopefully we can add a suitable picture at one point. Crispulop (talk) 19:41, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Last use of capital punishment in Spain

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

RB Leipzig: Planned exansion, language etc.

Hello

Thank you for your recent edits to the RB Leipzig article. I intend to expand the section regarding the 3. Liga today. I am not a native English speaker (I am Swedish), so if you would like to read the section later to review the language, that would be very much appreciated! Best regards /EriFr (talk) 11:42, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I've added the page to my watchlist, so after you expand it, I'll have another look. Valenciano (talk) 11:44, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Sings Songs From The Wiz

Sings Songs From The Wiz is at AfD now Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sings Songs From The Wiz JMHamo (talk) 00:45, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Debut/debuts

Pay attention: if you're going to write "he made his senior debut", not "debuts", so include the date, i.e.: "he made his senior debut on date in a score place result against opponent. If you don't have this info, leave "debuts" as it is, please. There's only one senior debut, but there's a debut goal, debut as a starter, a lot of debuts for a simple season/year, got it? That's why we write "debuts", and not "debut". Instead of re-reverting, why don't you start a discussion? Never saw you doing so. Cheers, MYS77 ^✉ 19:21, 5 December 2015 (UTC) {u|MYS77}

Please relax, mate. You've done fantastic work on improving work on football players and for that, credit where it's due. Based on your user page, you are not a native speaker of English. That's not a criticism, you have a level of English that most people would dream of. But debuts is not correct when we're speaking about a singular event. And when we speak of debut, in English, we're talking about when someone made a first appearance for the club. I suspect, based on this edit and edits in your sandbox, that you're annoyed with me because I created an article that you'd already been working on in your user space. That's unfortunate, but there really wasn't any problem with that version of the page. Unfortunately, you seem to take offence at being corrected rather than realising that this is a collaborative project. If I make mistakes in my rare contibutions to the Portuguese Wikipedia, you're more than welcome to correct me. No one is perfect. Valenciano (talk) 01:38, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

• Oh my God, are you sure you do know the meaning of the word "redundancy"? MYS77 ^✉ 23:03, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I do indeed. Especially since I've removed numerous tautologies across this project. What edit are you referring to? Valenciano (talk) 23:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) First of all, read the whole paragraph. That's what every people should do if they want to read. I don't see any books or any articles over-repeating words, and I edit using this line of thought. I don't think your edits were useful, that's why I reverted. I'm referring to Santi Mina and Rubén Herráiz, both unnecessary edits by including the year (??) if it's already specified before.

It's not over-repeating. They are two different things. A player signs for the club. Then makes a debut for the club. That they're in the same paragraph is absolutely irrelevant. It's perfectly possible, and common, to sign for a club one year and make a debut in a subsequent year. There is no "redundancy." Valenciano (talk) 23:36, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Of course that is perfectly possible. That's why we do write the year if a player makes the debut in a different year. If it's the same, it's clearly implicit, as every person in the world is taught that a year has 12 months, correct? MYS77 ^✉ 23:58, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't see at all how it's clearly implicit. A year has 12 months and a month can appear in more than one year. 12 October could be the same year he signed and it could be a different year. Sure, if the player signed in June 2015 and made their debut "on 12 October" then, at this point in time, only one year is possible, but a year from now, it could be October 2015 or October 2016. Further down the line, it gets even more unclear, so it's best to write the year now, rather than having to mess about updating articles later. Valenciano (talk) 00:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

You are the one who seems to be hounding me a little bit, right? Every page I create and/or edit, there's one edit from you right after. I don't take anything personally, mate. I just feel you could contribute more if you stop following me around. MYS77 ^✉ 23:18, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

MYS77, the edit in question is to Santi Mina, a Valencia player. Now, as my user name may suggest, I do have a certain interest in things Valencia-related and am a former season ticket holder at Valencia CF, so regularly update pages on the club and its players and not only here. Santi turns 20 today and scored his first goal for Valencia on Saturday.... you're seriously asking why I'm interested?!!! Before you start getting paranoid about me "following you around" do have a look at the contributors to the Santi Mina page on the Finnish Wikipedia from one month ago or edits to the Italian or German Wiki pages on him. I don't see you among them. I was editing pages on Spain and Spanish footballers long before you came on to this project. Valenciano (talk) 23:36, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

@Valenciano: You're using time in here to basically say you are more right than me? That's ugly, mate. Whatever, I will not revert you from now on, if that's what you want. You can go ahead in any page and type "the person here is a llama" and I will leave it that way. Fine? Cheers, MYS77 ^✉ 23:57, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

There's no need to ping me on my own user page. And, regarding the time thing, that is absolutely *not* what I said. When I said I was editing Spanish footballers pages back in 2007, the point there is in response to your accusations of "hounding." The point being that there is absolutely nothing new about me editing those pages. I don't just randomly turn up there out of the blue, I've always been interested in and active in that editing area. Nothing at all to do with being "more right." This is not a competition and I make mistakes like everyone. If you disagree on the redundancy issue, that's fine. We can get additional input at WP:FOOTY if you like. My worry is that you're taking it personally when we're both aiming for better articles. Don't. You do excellent work there. There's no need for us to assume the roles of Abdennour and Suarez. Valenciano (talk) 00:47, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

And you seem to miss some points of our conversation: when I've asked you if you're interested in something? Again, you're not reading all correctly, as you did in Jorge Marco de Oliveira Moraes (misreading of MOS:COMMA), remember ? MYS77 ^✉ 00:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

When? It's surely implicit in your hounding accusation above. I'm bemused that you're surprised at me editing the Santi Mina page, given that he's a fairly prominent Valencia player who scored against Barca. Your claim above is "Every page I create and/or edit, there's one edit from you right after" a claim that is clearly false, as I see tonnes of edits from you today, to pages I've never edited, though, if you'll forgive me, that has caused me to spot some errors in the Ricardo Gomes page, which I will edit after this. Valenciano (talk) 00:42, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

(EC) You're also doing a good work, but stop saying that I'm taking it personally when I'm not. You're accusing me of something I'm not doing, and that can be misunderstood by other people as a personal attack, aside from being a really boring thing to be read by me. I disagree with this year thing, as some people still do, but that's only confusing to some people who lack interpretation, in my opinion. To be really honest now, I'll simply drop it and leave WP for today. Cheers, MYS77 ^✉ 00:59, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

TPS here: hello Valenciano and MYS. Not following any guidelines here (I admit I am as dumb as they come regarding technicalities, and a bit of a free spirit), just using my grey matter. Also as a non-native user of the marvellous English language, my two are cents are as follows: if one starts a sentence saying "X player signed for Y club on 27 August 2013", then player scores his first goal the same year and it is referred to in text in the same paragraph (as it should!), why on earth do we need to state year again, isn't it implied? A different matter would be when we change paragraphs, then I totally agree with Valenciano, year must be stated even if it's still (per example provided above) 2013.

Happy week to both of you and the project, please message me if any additional thoughts are required --84.90.219.128 (talk) 23:24, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

• Many many of the tautologies Valenciano has removed have been inserted by me (i.e. "He played for four DIFFERENT clubs", that's redundancy and I apologize to the project for that). About the "debut vs debuts" war (for lack of a more proper term), maybe MYS picked it from me and it was I that was wrong all along, "double I'm sorry" in that case :( --84.90.219.128 (talk) 23:26, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

VK??

Quacking but is it loud enough?? Murry1975 (talk) 12:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Definitely him. Enough quacking to wake most of Sligo. But is it enough to roast the duck? As I found out when I filed the last SPI, he's learnt from his past mistakes and got cleverer about it, but not too clever since the main sock was blocked months after that. It's a shame because I see a lot of productive edits to boxing topics. If he'd stick to that and forget about the pointless nationalist edit warring I doubt anyone would notice him. I'd advise gathering evidence, but it'll probably come down to whether the admin feels the quacking is enough. Valenciano (talk) 15:00, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Murry1975 Have a look at these diffs: Donniediamond arguing Tyson Fury's Irishness based on self-identification and the fact that he's represented Britain and Ireland, blocked user Rivercityboy with identical arguments and Vintagekits again with the self identification/Irishness argument of Tyson Fury. Valenciano (talk) 21:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

78.26's RFA Appreciation award

	The 78.26 RFA Appreciation award
	Thank you for the participation and support at my RFA. It is truly appreciated. I hope to be of further help around here, and if you see me doing something dumb, you know where to find me. Again, I thank you. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 24:53, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Regional Championship

Can you create pages for each Regional Championship in Spain ? Asturias Centro Catalunia and Norte have separate page, but the rest do not have ! check : Template:Copa del Rey on the last line you will see the red links !--Alexiulian25 (talk) 11:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Alexiulian25, I could, but it would be in the future, as I'll be working on Spanish elections related things in the near future. I'd only do it if I can find enough refs on those. Unrelated thing: I notice on your user page that you have a list of Wikipedias, it's missing the Catalan Wikipedia, which has nearly 500,000 articles and the Latvian one, which has 65,000. Valenciano (talk) 16:38, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Valenciano If is on the future list, this is great ! [1] - this could be the main reference ! and with sure you can find some Spanish language references ! You are from Spain - that is why I asked you and you also are a native language speaker.

You can add the Catalan Wikipedia and the Latvia one and create another row with "Wikipedias with more articles 30→40". I wish you a Merry Christmas also !--Alexiulian25 (talk) 18:39, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Elections updates and missing deputies

I disagree, as even by removing the pie chart there wouldn't be enough space for them. I would suggest creating a new article to show MPs elected in each election (all of them) is that's to be the case, just as it's done for other countries (see here, here, or here). We should avoid mixing MPs elected with election results, as it may get confusing to people.

Also a new article could be used to show senators elected too. I had been thinking on doing it for much time but focused instead on results' sections and articles. This could be a good chance to do it. Impru20 (talk) 11:44, 26 December 2015 (UTC)