Talk:1994 Finnish European Union membership referendum
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Result table[edit]
The result table should use the same on as used on Template:UKEU2016Results with valid votes and total votes separated since the percentages don't match the total votes at the moment. --URunICon (talk) 19:54, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- (a) No it shouldn't and (b) the percentages and totals do match. The UK one is used only on a handful of articles and is not very well formatted. Number 57 20:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- But right now the numbers don't match like you yourself said above. So maybe change it so that it matches? This ain't rocket science. --URunICon (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
That is exactly why we should the numbers in different columns just like it is done in all other well made tables. Why else would all these other editors separate the valid and invalid votes? --URunICon (talk) 20:34, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- Again, I don't think it's required and the UK ones are not a common format. "other well made tables" is entirely subjective and is not a statement I agree with. Number 57 20:37, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- Total votes shown should be divisible with the for and against columns. You shouldn't have to subtract and do all this kind of nonsense to see if the numbers are correct. That's why it's done my way in other tables like the UK one above, and the source listed below the table. --URunICon (talk) 21:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
We could also compromise and use the {{Referendum}} template and correctly fill all the fields. --URunICon (talk) 21:11, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
It could look something like this:
Choice | Votes | % |
---|---|---|
For | 1,620,726 | 56.89 |
Against | 1,228,261 | 43.11 |
Valid votes | 2,848,987 | 99.55 |
Invalid or blank votes | 12,854 | 0.45 |
Total votes | 2,861,841 | 100.00 |
Registered voters/turnout | 4,042,607 | 70.79 |
Source: European Election Database |
--URunICon (talk) 21:19, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not really a fan of that format, but I'll agree to using it here and at Finnish prohibition referendum, 1931 on the condition that you stop trying to change the election results tables. How about that? Number 57 21:37, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- Remember that you don't have a monopoly on the election result tables. From now on you should use base templates to be consistent. Add quotemarks in
class
andstyle
to be proper. --URunICon (talk) 21:44, 4 February 2018 (UTC)- I'm aware that I don't have a monopoly. I won't be using base templates, because it won't be consistent with what's out there. And anyway, the only difference between a table created as a wikitable and one using Electiontable (assuming you do it in the article, which you should if it's not transcluded elsewhere) is the font size; I'm not entirely sure why 95% is an improvement on 100%. Number 57 21:50, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- Remember that you don't have a monopoly on the election result tables. From now on you should use base templates to be consistent. Add quotemarks in
- You could start a conversation about it on the {{election table}} talk page if you want to change the font. I don't make the rules. --URunICon (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- I was just in an edit conflict as I was going to also point out that Electiontable can't be used in instances when the table is hardcoded onto the article (which it should be in the majority of cases) as it creates [edit] and [discuss] links which then don't work – see here. Number 57 21:55, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- You could start a conversation about it on the {{election table}} talk page if you want to change the font. I don't make the rules. --URunICon (talk) 21:52, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- I guess that's where the font comes in. It's probably been discussed somewhere that it should be 95% since it's in the template. Like I said if you don't like the font, you should start a discussion to change it to 100%. --URunICon (talk) 22:03, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- But as the majority of election articles don't use electiontable, there's clearly not a great demand for a 95% setting (I've never seen it raised in the ten years I've been editing election articles). Anyway, we're drifting off topic here. I don't really like the table above, but it's a vast improvement on the UK one, so if you're willing to stop widening this dispute to any more articles, then I'll agree to it. Can we put this to bed now? Number 57 22:09, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
- I guess that's where the font comes in. It's probably been discussed somewhere that it should be 95% since it's in the template. Like I said if you don't like the font, you should start a discussion to change it to 100%. --URunICon (talk) 22:03, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Well once you've seen enough code you begin to differentiate what is good and what isn't and if even simple things like quotemarks are missing, you know it's not that good. --URunICon (talk) 22:40, 4 February 2018 (UTC)