Wikipedia:Peer review/Single Transferable Vote/archive1

Single Transferable Vote[edit]

I first found this article a few days after British Columbia had their referendum on it that barely failed in no small part due to a lack of voter knowledge about STV. Over the past month or so I, with the help of a few others, have been working quite heavily on it, and I'd like to get some fresh eyes to give it a good once over and make suggestions. I'm particularly interested in opinions about the articles length, as I believe it may be borderline too long and redundant in some parts - smoke em out if you spot em. Thanks! Scott Ritchie 06:52, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the content is very good. Two things that should be tidied up are stray sentences that should be merged into paragraphs, and incorporating the html links in text into a list of notes using Wikipedia:Footnote3. If you're worred about the length the section on counties that use STV could be move to another page and described in this article in summary style, the table of contents is very long and this would help reduce the lenght of both the article and the TOC. I don't think it is too long as is, except for the lenght of the TOC.--nixie 04:16, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thansk for the eyes. I took a stab at most of the stray sentences I could find - the chief culprit seemed to be the history section. I think it looks a lot cleaner now. I'll take a stab at footnoting soon, but in the mean time is there anything else to clean up in the text? Scott Ritchie 09:54, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, article is all footnoted now. Any other comments before I send it off to FAC? Scott Ritchie 06:40, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, hi - I have never engaged in Wikipedia editing before, but I noticed what may be a very minor typo: the line, "Example: in a 1,000,000 voter constituency with 4 seats, the quote would be 250,000 votes, not 200,001." I am presuming that the intent was for the word "quota" rather than the printed "quote." Hope that helps?