Talk:2021 Moldovan parliamentary election

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Nastase Primar.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Electoral system

It seem the paralell voting system, which had only been used in 2019, was scrapped for this election [1].--Aréat (talk) 01:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Contradictory vote percentages

I noticed the vote per centages in the infobox contradict the per centages in the "Preliminary results" section. Bettering the Wiki (talk) 05:29, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

That is because the results are still preliminary. At the time I'm writing this, 3/2150 voting stations have still not been processed. Super Ψ Dro 06:50, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Actual percentage here.Yger (talk) 07:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Preliminary results

@Number 57: I added the official preliminary results from the CEC (page 66 of the pdf), although I'm a bit puzzled by the different types of the registered voters and invalid votes, to be honest. --Aréat (talk) 01:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aréat: Thanks! I think you've done it all correctly. Based on previous elections, the number of registered voters is rows a + b in the table in the pdf (number of voters included in electoral lists + number of voters in the additional lists), so 3,052,603.

Invalid is 13,749 (row f in the table). The difference between valid + invalid (1,480,965) and "total participating" (1,481,273) is voters who took a ballot paper but didn't put it in the ballot box (which is row e in the table, 308). Cheers, Number 57 09:08, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Excellent, then! Do you know why there's a confusing "Rata participării: 52.30%", though ? --Aréat (talk) 09:35, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

No, I can't work it out. I've tried every combination of registered voters (including or excluding the additional list) and ballots taken/votes cast/valid votes only. None of them are 52.30%... If you work backwards, 52.3% of the original voters list is 1,447,682, which is less than the number of valid votes (1,467,216), but including the supplementary list, it's 1,586,051, which is far higher than any of the vote totals... Number 57 11:23, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Infobox style

@Number 57: Why is it you consider the list style infobox superior to the parliamentary style infobox? Looking back through all the Moldovan parliamentary election results since 1990, there has never been a result where more than 5 parties were elected, so a list-style infobox does not seem particularly required. The list-style is useful when there are numerous parties or alliances, such as in Croatian or Dutch politics, but I don't know that it's useful for the kind of results that Moldovan elections seem to produce. Furthermore, parliamentary-style infoboxes display much more information than the list style. CeltBrowne (talk) 05:30, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Because it's far more compact and therefore a more effective summary – if Infobox election goes over one row (as it had to on the 2019 election and would on several others), you generally can't see it on a single screen.

I also don't think it's correct to refer to Infobox election as "parliamentary-style" – Infobox legislative election is a parliamentary one as it's specifically designed for parliamentary elections. For parliamentary elections we elect parties, not individual people, so the excessive details around party leaders (particularly the images) are unnecessary IMO. Cheers, Number 57 12:33, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

If Infobox election goes over one row (as it had to on the 2019 election and would on several others), you generally can't see it on a single screen.

I don't know what it's like on your (presumably mobile/cell) screen, but for example, 2020 Irish general election is quite easily navigable on my mobile screen despite using the parliamentary style and featuring nine parties.

For parliamentary elections we elect parties, not individual people, so the excessive details around party leaders (particularly the images) are unnecessary IMO.

Other than by displaying an image and name of the party leader, the parliamentary style infobox does not focus on the leadership of the party. The information provided instead focuses on gains or losses by a party as a whole. Secondly, British, Irish, Scottish, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Finish, German parliamentary democracies all elect parties, not individuals, as well, yet their articles use the type of infobox I tried to add to this article as well. In many cases, there are far fewer Moldovan parties elected than in those comparable multi-party democracies. For parliamentary democracies elections, it seems that the style I tried to add, rather than the previous one, is the one primarily used on Wikipedia. In particular, this article has only 3 parties elected to parliament, so I don't feel there's any need for a compact style infobox. If the Moldovians had a system akin to that of the neighbouring Romanians, I would concede that the list style infobox would be more suitable. Because so much information has to be displayed, for example, in 2020 Romanian legislative election, because two houses are being elected, the list makes more sense. However, 2021 Moldovan parliamentary election only features 3 parties being elected to one house. That's less than the 4 parties featured in 2019 United Kingdom general election's infobox. I feel that the type of infobox I tried to add is the primary one used for European democracies and there are few reasons to use a different style over it. CeltBrowne (talk) 18:09, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I was referring to a computer/laptop screen. On the Irish example I can only see the top row of parties without having to scroll (and not even the full details – on a laptop it cuts off at the seats won line). It therefore isn't an effective summary mechanism.

Other countries using the other infobox is simply because Infobox legislative election was developed some time after Infobox election and it hasn't been rolled out as much (or in one case, the attempted adoption was blocked due to resistance to change), meaning usage is not a reflection on suitability (for British elections it would be a vast improvement to switch to the legislative one as there are many parties left out of the existing infobox). Number 57 21:47, 11 September 2021 (UTC)