User talk:Frenchpolit
Welcome![edit]
Hi Frenchpolit! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 02:19, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Bare links[edit]
If you add a reference to an entry, could you please take the time to expand the reference including (at least) the title, source, and date? Cf. WP:CITE. An example of one of your recent contributions: §. Thank you. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 11:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- I've read the article you provided a bare URL to as a reference. You should also mention the language of sources you add. Nowhere in the article is Article 40 mentioned. Of course you are correct that this was a detail of that 17th no-confidence vote... however, as it stands that is OR not mentioned in the source. Be careful... you obviously have a lot of knowledge, but this is not a place for unsourced prose, even if some pages are woefully under-sourced. I've left the source you added as a bare URL in hopes that you will clean up... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 18:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments and suggestions, but I'm pretty new to editing on Wikipedia, so I still don't know how to make the necessary changes... Frenchpolit (talk) 18:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- No problem. Between the link above to WP:CITE and the corrective edit another WPian made of your contributions here, you should have a good model. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 18:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again, I'll be looking into that shortly. Frenchpolit (talk) 18:31, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- No problem. Between the link above to WP:CITE and the corrective edit another WPian made of your contributions here, you should have a good model. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 18:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments and suggestions, but I'm pretty new to editing on Wikipedia, so I still don't know how to make the necessary changes... Frenchpolit (talk) 18:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Infobox[edit]
Hello. The purpose of an infobox is to provide a quick summary of the key details of the election. IMO the primary detail of an election is the number of seats won by each party, with secondary details being share of the vote, change compared to last election and party leaders.
I do not think this this version is an effective summary; it contains far too many details (including ones that are violations of the infobox's usage requirements), as well as large and unnecessary images of individuals (this is a parliamentary election and not a presidential one).
IMO the newer one is far less confusing than the old one – it provides an easy-to-read list of the seats won by each party, plus their first round vote share and seat changes; it also lists more parties than the older one despite being less than half the size. I'm struggling to see what is unclear with it. Second round vote figures would not be a useful addition IMO, as they are skewed by the number of constituencies individual parties made it through to the second round in. Cheers, Number 57 17:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hello,
- Thanks for your response. I'm ok with what you're saying there, but precisely, the main issue I have with the new infobox is that, for the 2022 French legislative elections, it currently only includes second round results for the popular vote, which I think makes the whole thing highly unclear for anyone who's not used to French politics (TRS in particular). When I made the necessary changes to include both rounds results to the infobox, it was swiftly reverted. At this stage, the article is not as clear and intelligible as it should be.
- Regards. Frenchpolit (talk) 17:50, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Fair point, I assumed the percentages were first round. I would change that. We could also add a note saying that the percentages are first round only. Cheers, Number 57 18:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Great! See this version. That was the one I made using your new infobox. IMO it was far clearer and intelligible than the current version. Frenchpolit (talk) 18:08, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think it is, and trying to squeeze in that additional information distorts the infobox quite badly which makes it much harder to read. The additional information in the party and leader columns is unnecessary and (in the latter case) a violation of infobox rules, while the percentages simply don't fit. Again, I would put in the first round percentages only, with a note. I personally don't think second round percentages are useful in summarising the election results, as they are skewed. Checking again, it appears that the percentages in the infobox (right now) are the first round ones, so the only change I would make to the status quote is a footnote saying they are first round percentages. Cheers, Number 57 18:14, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again. I just checked it and it's far more intelligible as of right now. It's just been done by the way, so I didn't know. The only thing standing out rn would be the mark "New" on the Ensemble column... it looks as if Macron's presidential coalition was brand new when in fact it just rebranded itself. The correct thing to do would be to have clear seat change figures (for instance, "-105/106" and not "New". Frenchpolit (talk) 18:30, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ah yes, I agree on the Ensemble point. Usual practice is to show seat changes for coalitions compared to the respective parties' performance at the previous election (either alone or as part of previous coalitions). Have amended it. Cheers, Number 57 21:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- That's great! Thanks again. Frenchpolit (talk) 21:54, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ah yes, I agree on the Ensemble point. Usual practice is to show seat changes for coalitions compared to the respective parties' performance at the previous election (either alone or as part of previous coalitions). Have amended it. Cheers, Number 57 21:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again. I just checked it and it's far more intelligible as of right now. It's just been done by the way, so I didn't know. The only thing standing out rn would be the mark "New" on the Ensemble column... it looks as if Macron's presidential coalition was brand new when in fact it just rebranded itself. The correct thing to do would be to have clear seat change figures (for instance, "-105/106" and not "New". Frenchpolit (talk) 18:30, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think it is, and trying to squeeze in that additional information distorts the infobox quite badly which makes it much harder to read. The additional information in the party and leader columns is unnecessary and (in the latter case) a violation of infobox rules, while the percentages simply don't fit. Again, I would put in the first round percentages only, with a note. I personally don't think second round percentages are useful in summarising the election results, as they are skewed. Checking again, it appears that the percentages in the infobox (right now) are the first round ones, so the only change I would make to the status quote is a footnote saying they are first round percentages. Cheers, Number 57 18:14, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Great! See this version. That was the one I made using your new infobox. IMO it was far clearer and intelligible than the current version. Frenchpolit (talk) 18:08, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Fair point, I assumed the percentages were first round. I would change that. We could also add a note saying that the percentages are first round only. Cheers, Number 57 18:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]
Hello, Frenchpolit. Thank you for your work on 2023 French government reshuffle. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, I had the following comments:
Hey there! Hope you're having a great day. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia with your article. I'm happy to inform you that your article has adhered to Wikipedia's policies, so I've marked it as reviewed. Have a fantastic day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 09:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Apologies[edit]
Sorry, I shouldn't have popped in again. Don't worry about edit conflicts I'm done over there for today. :) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 00:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
- No worries... and no need for an apology!
- Take care. Frenchpolit (talk) 00:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)