Jump to content

Talk:Elections in India

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

It would be awfully great if somebody found the time to research and write an article about the historically very important Indian general election of 1937. -- Mkill 22:52, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Missing details

[edit]

The article doesn't talk about many features unique to elections in India: the use of indelible ink to mark voters, and election symbols (which, if I am not mistaken, are for the benefit of illiterate voters). It would be great if someone more informed than I am could add a little bit about these things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.130.105.12 (talk) 00:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merger Proposal

[edit]

Given that these two articles (Elections in India and Indian election process) are on exactly the same topic, I think they should be merged. I even considered proposing merging both of them into Politics of India but I thought that might be a bit over the top. I reckon this one should stay and the other should be merged into this. Largely because I think this has the better title of the two. Also, many many more articles link to this one than Indian election process even though it is the older article, so this should stay for minimum disruption.

Unfortunately I know *nothing* about the Indian election process. I could try merging the articles myself, but I wouldn't know what to do if I found conflicting information.

Any volunteers? :) --Sammysam 18:34, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few guidelines to improve 'Elections in India'

[edit]

Elections in India is truly a phenomenon in my opinion. It may be hilarious to watch the parties fight over promises to gain power, but in itself it is a great process, a huge one indeed. It is not simply a process. Massive media coverage, a huge fan following, the fanaticism, is part and parcel of the way elections go. I wanted to improve this article and bring it to FA status if possible.

  • The history of elections section can include
    • the way elections are conducted
    • the changes so far (I never knew there were two-seat constituencies in the 1950s!!!)
    • the transition from paper ballot to EVMs
  • The history of party/party system section may focus on
    • the single party (congress) dominance
    • the gradual movement to two-party system
    • and then the movement to coalition system which we see today
  • The powers of the election commission may deal in brief with the powers and the importance of the election commission during the elections.
  • The electoral process may focus on the actual step-by-step process
    • publishing of electoral rolls
    • announcement of dates
    • model code of conduct
    • canvassing
    • actual voting process
    • counting of votes
    • announcement of results
    • submission of the list of successful candidates to the president/governor
    • formation of the govt.
  • The culture and impact (both societal and economic) section may focus on
    • the associated fanaticism
    • media coverage
    • advertisements
    • use of party-aligned television channels
    • the festivities after winning the elections
    • drama over formation of government
  • The elections as of now section may be trivial, but i felt i should include it. May be that could be merged with any of the sections. I felt this should include
    • ban of posters/extravagant spending
    • aspects of model code of conduct
  • The electoral reforms section may focus on the proposed electoral reforms like
    • negative/neutral voting
    • stuff related to elections in future
  • Miscellaneous
    • exit polls
    • alliance formation
    • rigging
    • booth capturing

Plus we need more election related photos! Election Commission of India website is a good source for statistics, and a number of news articles can be found online. I came across articles in new york times as old as 1984 in archives, which may be very useful, to provide a historical perspective.

Happy editing. Cheers -- Chez (Discuss / Email) • 12:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:ECI logo.jpg

[edit]

Image:ECI logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:EVM carried on elephant.jpg

[edit]

Image:EVM carried on elephant.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phases?

[edit]

I have looked all around and cannot find what the phases mean/are? This article and the article for the 2009 Election both talk about the phases of the election, but none tell what the phases are? If I knew I'd add it to the articles. 98.28.68.59 (talk) 19:39, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bad writing and grammar

[edit]

Article is awfully written and almost incoherent in places. Needs a thorough re-write and edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jokester99 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

[edit]

Proposing a merge with General elections in India. Any thoughts? ReformatMe (talk) 10:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]

I moved this over here from the source article so that the discussion can be centralized. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC) I propose that "None of the above" voting option in India be merged into Elections in India. A separate article is unnecessary. A section within the destination article would best serve visitors. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:33, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit on the fence about this one. Since India doesn't actually have a "none of the above" option, I'm not sure that it really belongs in this article, which is about how elections are run (and were in the past). My initial feeling is to keep that article separate, but I could be persuaded otherwise. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Keeping it separate may end up looking like a WP:CRYSTAL issue and perhaps even an essay of sorts. I can see no problem with addressing a proposed change in voting systems within the Elections article: we are allowed to present more than one viewpoint & it could be argued that presenting the proposal as a counter to the current electoral system makes for a more rounded article. - Sitush (talk) 11:44, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't feel that proposed laws fall under WP:CRYSTAL. We routinely create articles on proposed laws, so long as those proposals have been the subject of significant, in depth coverage in RS. These articles can even be maintained after the laws fail (assuming again, that they were found notable in the past), so long as it is clear whether or not the laws ever passed. Keeping it here preserves the article, because Notability is not Temporary. However, "importance" is temporary; so if the law is never passed, and the information is merged, then the information could easily be removed from Elections in India later because it is no longer important to that topic. That seems like a loss to me. If our concern is helping people see the information, we just need to make sure there's a wikilink in the proposed target. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:17, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't feel strongly enough to insist this be deleted; if one of you wants to pull of the merge, feel free to do so (I would, but I'm not likely to have time to do so in the near future). Qwyrxian (talk) 06:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. That was the least fun I've had since I fell in lava. I got most of it right while cursing a lot. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:57, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elected directly by the people?

[edit]

The second sentence of this article states that the Prime Minister of India is elected directly by the people. But other articles indicate that India has a Westminster-type parliament, where the leader of the top party/coalition in the parliament becomes the prime minister. That's not the same thing as directly electing the individual who is to become the prime minister. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 06:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Well spotted. - Sitush (talk) 06:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Source showing Westminster model applies. - Sitush (talk) 06:57, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I guess the source mentioned by Sitush has moved to Source, which clearly specifies that PM can be member of either Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha. We know that members of Rajya Sabha are not elected directly by the people of India. Also we know that current PM of India is from Rajya Sabha: Source. Thus, I propose to remove the sentence in question. Alok Bansal (talk) 23:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Might it not be better to state that the PM can be a member of either etc, as you say in your message above? - Sitush (talk) 01:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should not be as after this modification, sentence will have nothing to do with the election process and this information should be and is reflected in the article, Prime Minister of India. Alok Bansal (talk) 10:21, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

>> EYE SPY: Voting visuals*(Lihaas (talk) 18:19, 21 March 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

New schedule election

[edit]

In new schedule is monday and thursday

First Monday
Region Seats
Uttar Pradesh 80
Mizoram 1
Nagaland 1
Sikkim 1
Andaman and Nicobar island 1
Total 84
First Thursday
Region Seats
Maharashtra 48
Kerala 20
Uttarakhand 5
Tripura 2
Chandigarh 1
Total 76
Second Monday
Region Seats
West Bengal 42
Assam 14
Jharkhand 14
Himachai Pradesh 4
Dadra and Nagra Haveli 1
Total 75
Second Thursday
Region Seats
Andhra Pradesh 42
Odisha 21
Delhi 7
Arunachai Pradesh 2
Daman and Diu 1
Total 73
Third Monday
Region Seats
Bihar 40
Rajasthan 25
Haryana 10
Goa 2
Lakshadweep 1
Total 78
Third Thursday
Region Seats
Tamil Nadu 39
Gurajat 26
Chhattisgarh 11
Manipur 2
Puducherry 1
Total 79
Last Monday
Region Seats
Madhya Pradesh 29
Karnataka 28
Punjab 13
Jammu and Kashmir 6
Meghalaya 2
Total 78

That is democrary for India. This is 7 in 5 method.

Three party regenoised:

  • National party (all province)
  • Regional party (partial province)
  • Local party (only one province)

Akuindo (talk) 11:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

controversy section - previous opinion polls proved to be wrong

[edit]

Opinion polls have been proved to be wrong in 2004 and 2009 elections.

In 2004, for example, the final opinion polls gave the NDA a clear victory. Star News-CVoter gave the alliance 267-279. India Today-ORG 282, and NDTV-IE-Nielsen 287-307. However, the final figures were 185 for the BJP and allies and 275 for Congress and allies.

In 2009, too, the opinions got it badly wrong. Most polls saw the Congress slipping, and the BJP rising. While Star News-Nielsen gave the Congress plus allies 203, TheWeek-CVoter gave Congress 234, CNN-IBN 185-205, and India TV-CVoter 189-201. The final result was: 262 to Congress+, and 159 for BJP-plus. It clearly showed the opinion poll was all wrong.

http://www.firstpost.com/politics/if-opinion-polls-have-got-it-wrong-nda-may-end-up-with-300-1482303.html

This fact must be added in the controversy section to make the article neutral. 122.151.102.179 (talk) 00:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the controversy section of the Opinion polling for the Indian general election, 2014 122.151.102.179 (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and according to fair use may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 01:08, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Elections in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:52, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Elections in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Elections in India. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"2029 Indian general election" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 2029 Indian general election. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix (talk) 17:07, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Indian general election, 1985" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Indian general election, 1985. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix (talk) 17:10, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About voters responsibility 203.192.244.191 (talk) 15:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"2028 elections in India" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect 2028 elections in India has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 26 § 2028 elections in India until a consensus is reached. Rusalkii (talk) 22:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Social project work

[edit]

About mp election's


2409:408C:2D1F:E2DE:8D67:D74:6FC9:7A96 (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Community Economic and Social Development II

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 12 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Abhisheksaini007 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Sneha. .0529 (talk) 00:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Algorithm?

[edit]

The section elections in India#Electoral procedures says nothing about the algorithms used at federal, state or local elections in India. The main systems for a single-candidate constituency are roughly grouped into

but which is (are) used in India? The general impression seems to be that most Indian elections used FPTP (due to the historical accident of being colonised by the British Empire of which the UK still uses FPTP), but whatever the answer is, it needs some proper sources. Boud (talk) 01:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tqudasudksujsus es eggs EU bsnsjej sjjeudjd djjsuei sjjeudjd ejdyfu rjdjhdyrj Dr dhada djjdue ehdhd rhe 2409:408D:3090:2749:0:0:19C1:B8AC (talk) 09:44, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yehsysheejr eie

[edit]

Vdvahajac wfslelr eh HD eihrndidkd ejneysjehe eh eiahhsscagshhsehe hajjwjwj wiwjw ejjjeje jee ekjeue ruhe jehetu jehetu even eye 2409:408D:3090:2749:0:0:19C1:B8AC (talk) 09:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Political science

[edit]

Election in India 110.224.241.251 (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Political science

[edit]

Election in India 110.224.241.251 (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elections_in_India&oldid=1255763588"