Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indian politics/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian politics. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Color scheme

Hello everyone, can some help me get all the hex codes of the Indian Political parties so that helps in better contribution like creating/editing election maps accordingly. Thank you. 456legend(talk) 06:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

@456legend Hex codes of all political parties and alliances are available at Module:Political party. Dhruv edits (talk) 06:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

February 2023

I ask all users of Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian politics,

to give their valuable neutral opinions in Talk:Shiv Sena#Proposal to merge Balasahebanchi Shiv Sena into Shiv Sena and Template:Infobox legislative election.

Help-election article

Hi, can someone update this particular section: 2018 Telangana Legislative Assembly election#Results by constituency as per new district scheme released in the year 2016 (since this election happened in the year 2018). Info related to the list of constituencies district wise is available here: List of constituencies of the Telangana Legislative Assembly

Please do the needful. Thank you 456legend(talk) 11:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

D. P. Jadeja

Can anyone from this WikiProject figure out whether D. P. Jadeja is still living? The article is categorized as a BLP, but the first sentence is using the past-tense "was". The description for the file being used in the main infobox also states "The demise date of this politician namely D. P. Jadeja (Daulatsinhji Pratapsinhji Jadeja) was not known", and I'm not sure what that means. It could mean Jadeja is dead but his date of death is not known, or it could mean it's not known whether he is dead or still living. I tried Googling is name and I did find this in The Indian Express which seems to be about the same person, but I'm not completely sure. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:54, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Everything from the Indian express article matches with the wiki article. MP from jamnagar in the 80's, etc. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:06, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for looking at this MPGuy2824. I've added a bit about his death to the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Article contribution

I urge all editors, especially those who are interested in political articles, to write and develop liberalism in India, conservatism in India, and socialism in India articles properly. These three articles are poorly written. Kindly write these three articles properly. 2405:201:800B:6079:18E:2861:F214:9CD7 (talk) 05:25, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Collab?

Hi, I am currently working on cleaning up articles under this Category:Assembly constituencies of Andhra Pradesh. Interested users can approach me on my talk page to collaborate, and you can also view the current status of the cleanup here: User:456legend#Cleanup Drives - Current. Thank you. 456legend(talk) 07:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Parliament diagram

Hello. I noticed the indian election pages, on the national as well as on the state level, are the only ones to make election diagrams in which the colored dots for parties seats are circled in black, like here. All the others elections pages of every others countries simply have the colors, without the black circles, like here, so I don't see how it's needed. Meanwhile, the black circles add a lot of contrast which make the colors look way darker than they are, and it make it a bit hard to look at overall. I'm not saying all the old files should be replaced, it would cause a lot of work, but I suggest the use of black circles be phased out as elections go by. What do you think? Aréat (talk) 23:46, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Either seem fine to me. I'll note that the default setting of the tool is to have 0 width of the border. Most folks will use the default (except if a party's color is close to white). Maybe you can talk with the people who use a border for each color and come to a consensus. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@Aréat The use of black border is necessary because in Indian elections, there are a lot of independent MLAs/ MPs/ councillors, represented by light grey color, which will be barely visible in white background without a border. Same is the case with seats that get vacant, white color is completely invisible without a border. Also, as noted by MPGuy2824, 0 width border is default, which is why many don't care to add a border. In order to have a consistent approach, black borders are added to most of the election diagrams. Dhruv edits (talk) 02:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@Dhruv edits: Independents candidates getting seats is very common in many countries in which we still use grey without problems, shades such as #DCDCDC are visible enough on a white background, cf for example here in Gambia last election. I can see the need for vacant white seats, although imo having them invisible portray well the fact they're vacants. But if it's really needed, maybe we can agree on the use of black borders for the vacants seats only? I know it's the defaut way the page work, but it doesn't mean the diagrams made without it were done so because the user didn't bother. Rather, they obviously didn't feel a need for it. The question really is : if it's not used for the election pages of the 190+ others countries plus their states and regional ones, is it really needed in the first place on indian ones? I don't see what it add. Meanwhile, it has the clear shortcoming of making the party colors look darker than they are, when the purpose of the diagrams in the first place is to show their seats in a way that they're identifiable by their colors.--Aréat (talk) 12:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

This system is seen again recently on the Malaysian election. I think it could be extended to Indian election as well, per the arguments above. @Dhruv edits: What do you think?--Aréat (talk) 05:16, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

What were the parties in government after the 1969 Bihar Legislative Assembly election?

I'm trying to create a proper parliament diagram (with the govt on one side, and the opposition on the other) for that election, and although INC was the largest party, and one of its MLAs became the CM, they didn't have a majority (118 vs the 160 needed). Even counting all the independents (24), they still only reach 142. If anyone can find me a ref to say which other parties joined them, it would help a lot. Thanks. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:06, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

@MPGuy2824 Congress formed the government with support of 5 other parties and independents. Names of these parties and no. of seats are available at Bihar politics (1967–1977) at page 178. Dhruv edits (talk) 07:13, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Dhruv. I've updated the page and the parl diagram with the data from that source. The parl diagram is still showing the older version (due to caching), but i guess it will update within 24 hours. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:32, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Credibility bot

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 17:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Need assistance for Constituency maps

Hi, i want help for working constituency maps for all Indian assembly constituencies. thanks in advance - IJohnKennady (talk) 06:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Proposal: Consolidating WikiProject Indian Law

Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian Law seems to overlap significantly with the scope of the Indian Politics WikiProject. As I understand, much of the scope of the page is on statutes and caselaw, as opposed to biographical and historical work. Given the largely inactive status of that WikiProject, perhaps we could merge it (along with some standardization efforts here).

@MPGuy2824 @MohitSingh @Sirmirror @AirshipJungleman29 Norm88 (talk) 12:23, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Indian national and state legislature pages must liberate.

The Indian legislator pages must liberate as the legislator pages of foreign nations. This can be done as follows:- 1. Color boxes must be added for alliances as parties info boxes. 2. Indian election pages must use all dates as possible. 3. Good images of leaders must be used in Indian election pages of nearly similar sizes. Moreover, I've seen Indian pages based on politics aren't attractive. Md. Sirajuddaula (talk) 12:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Legislative Assembly constituencies

Hi, I am currently working on the following cleanup drive, Wikipedia:WikiProject Andhra Pradesh/Assembly constituencies update - 2023 along with few other users. Interested users can join this drive to contribute to accomplish even small tasks so that we can collectively standardise and bring consistency to all the Indian assembly constituencies. Thank you. 456legend(talk) 06:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion invitation

Hi, I have started a new discussion on Talk:Bharat Rashtra Samithi#Historical name usage in articles?. Please consider participating and provide your opinion. 456legend (talk) 07:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

FLRC for List of chief ministers from the Bharatiya Janata Party

I have nominated List of chief ministers from the Bharatiya Janata Party for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. RunningTiger123 (talk) 18:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Request For Review

I've written an article on Vijay Nirani. Wanted to try writing my own Wikipedia Article and came across him in the news so thought he'd be interesting to write on. Could someone help me with reviewing it, I made the first round of edits but it's been pending approval for two weeks now. Workingisnotworking13 (talk) 06:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Request to update Criteria for info box.

"Only those parties that are covered by Reliable Media as a major contender for winning that election are listed in the infobox." is the current criteria for adding a party to the info box. However, based on it, a few points I think should get raised are:

1. One needs to wait till opinion polls (which come just before the election often) are out to add a party to the info box. So, till then the info might not be accurate.

2. The party may or may not be covered in so called "reliable" media as few/all media outlets might try to downplay a particular party. However, the ground level scenario might be different. What to do in this case? Depriving voters of information because some so called 'reputable/reliable media' did not cover doesn't seems appropriate to me.

3. Shouldn't a party that at least won 1 seat (Not zero) in the immediately previous election be added to the info box as it can stand to either improve their seat share this election?

4. Shouldn't the sitting party in govt and the opposition party be automatically added to it? (Although any article may cover it or not) Cvrr (talk) 13:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@Cvrr

First, Opinion polls are just a way to see what analysis is done by reliable sources. It is not necessarily based on it. Analysis articles are also considered to determine major contenders.
Second, There are Independent media outlets too that do unbiased analysis. And above all Wikipedia works on sourced content. If you think this is incorrect then Wikipedia is not the place for you.
Third, If we start adding every party that got one seat in previous election then think how big an infobox can be. How many parties should be added considering this proposal in case of Tamil Nadu or Kerala. Tamil Nadu has MLAs from 9-10 parties and Kerala has from more than 15-16 parties. So shall we add all? Definitely no. So this can't be considered.
Party whose govt is there and largest opposition party are definitely added without debate whether sources cover it or not.

I hope I have given all your answers. ShaanSengupta^Talk 16:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Third, If we start adding every party that got one seat in previous election then think how big an infobox can be. How many parties should be added considering this proposal in case of Tamil Nadu or Kerala. Tamil Nadu has MLAs from 9-10 parties and Kerala has from more than 15-16 parties. So shall we add all? Definitely no. So this can't be considered. - I understand your concern. So, can we do something like adding those parties in case the number of parties are limited to say 5 or 6? If more than that, as you've said it is too much info to fit into the info box.

Party whose govt is there and largest opposition party are definitely added without debate whether sources cover it or not. - Sure, but I raised this because it is better if we explicitly mention it in the criteria so that it is explicitly made clear. Cvrr (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

@Cvrr format is same for every page. We can't use different format for every other page. If we add now then maybe some other editor can come up that if this can be added bcoz of 1 seat why not that. This will never end. So better only to add major contenders. ShaanSengupta^Talk 17:45, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the absolutist language ("Definitely no. So this can't be considered"), this needs to be couched as a personal opinion rather than fact. Personally I don't see the issues with adding 9–10 parties to an infobox or even 15–16. This is pretty normal for election articles for numerous other countries which use {{Infobox legislative election}} – see 2023 Dutch general election (15 parties) or 2022 Danish general election (16 parties) as an example. This infobox was designed for countries where large numbers of parties win seats in parliament – which is a category India fits into. I think the issue is more resistance to change. Number 5 7 18:04, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Wow! This template {{Infobox legislative election}} is brilliant. It addresses all my concerns. I think we should be able to go ahead with this. Any concerns? @Shaan Sengupta Cvrr (talk) 18:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Using this infobox is completely ok. It's just that personally I don't prefer it because it doesn't have party symbol or leader image. If you want to go ahead with it you can. ShaanSengupta^Talk 02:21, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Sure @Shaan Sengupta, I understand your concern about party leader image and party symbol. So, shall we go back to what I suggested? Using the old infobox for parties upto 5 or 6, but if they are more than 6 we'll use this infobox? {{Infobox legislative election}}

This way when the parties are less in number we'll have more information and when the number of parties exceed a threshold, the information can be condensed by using the other infobox. What do you say? Cvrr (talk) 03:23, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

I gave my concerns. I leave the rest on you. Also I leave this discussion. You do what you think is right. Just keep it mind it doesn't defy rules. Happy editing. ShaanSengupta^Talk 05:57, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Sure @Shaan Sengupta. Thanks a lot for participating in this discussion and giving your valuable time & opinion.

I believe that using the current infobox if the number of parties to be added is less than or equal to 6 is fine. However, if the number of parties to be added crosses that threshold, we should use {{Infobox legislative election}} so that the information is not cramped up.

Thanks to @Number 57 for bringing up {{Infobox legislative election}} infobox template. That is very helpful in Indian context where we tend to have a lot of political parties.

Thanks All!! Happy editing! Cvrr (talk) 06:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Help!?

Hi, can someone join me in this discussion to help me figure out what is the status of some of these legislators from the 15th Andhra Pradesh Assembly, especially when they have left the party (initially won) to join the other but haven't officially considered by the Speaker since that would have disqualified them from the party as per the anti-defectipn law. Now while some of the legislators party is reflected in the article, the others isn't. It is quite confusing and I seek your comments. Thank you. 456legend talk 01:58, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Endless edit warring on general election infoboxes

Hello. I have all the Indian general election articles on my watchlist, and I see endless edit warring on them, primarily over (a) which parties to include beyond the main two and (b) images of party leaders.

Can I suggest than Indian general elections adopt {{Infobox legislative election}}, which allows all parties to have won seats to be listed and has no images of party leaders, which should end the edit warring? As an example this is what the 1967 election article could look like (although it would need someone to fill in the missing party leaders). Despite listing all 20 parties, it takes up less space than the version with only five parties. It also has the advantage of avoiding using images of party leaders like this, which always looks a bit odd.

It is also possible to split the infobox up into national parties, state parties and other (like this). Cheers, Number 5 7 14:37, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Just a a follow-up to this – edit warring over the infoboxes of historic elections seems to have markedly increased in the last few weeks – constant changes of leader photos and removals and additions of certain parties. Does anyone have any objections to this being rolled out across the general election article series? Number 5 7 20:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

No objections to this suggestion. It seems like a good idea to prevent edit warring. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:42, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Comment I am in favor of this approach only until the results are declared. But once the results are declared, I would like to include only the notable and winning parties in the infobox. As for historical elections, we must enforce the rule: The major contenders should not be removed from infobox after the results are declared even if they get 0 seats, because they "were" the major contenders "during" the election. It would be beneficial to discuss and document who the major contenders were during an election (all the Indian historical general elections), in my opinion. Maybe this could be achieved by setting a realistic standard?

456legend talk 02:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Firstly, there is no "rule" that must be enforced. But more importantly, the whole issue is that no-one can decide what "notable and winning" parties are, hence the endless edit warring over which parties to include. In some cases very small parties are "winners" because they are part of the winning coalition. Keeping the existing infobox format also doesn't end the endless edit warring over leader images. What is your issue with just including all the parties in the infobox? Number 5 7 11:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

India is a country with huge number of political parties and including all of them in the infobox will only make it very lengthy and might not be suitable for the reader to focus their attention on the election highlights. I don't think hosting information regarding all the parties contesting in the election on the infobox even after the election results declared is feasible. Regarding the criteria on "notable and winning", I am of the opinion that a maximum of 4 parties should be allowed to be on the infobox provided they have secured 3% of vote share with atleast 1 seat in the election. (This is a ideal case that they are treated notable when they are contesting in a election in a state or in the general. There would be a huge probability that they are covered by the reputed and reliable sources.)456legend talk 17:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian politics/Election: Article structure. We can use Infobox legislative election too. So, don't edit war and remove this from Kerala and Tamil Nadu লাল সেলাম কমরেড (talk) 22:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

~~I agree with just like 2022 Italian general election লাল সেলাম কমরেড (talk) 17:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)~~