Talk:Results of the 2014 Indian general election

Wording

I suggest replacing "losing candidate" with "runner-up". Often there are 10-20 candidates in each seat, the one coming second isn't necessarily the "loser". --Soman (talk) 10:24, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Sub-article proposal

I propose a sub-article with the title Results of the 2014 Indian general election by state. This article might get too big for a single article. Zee money (talk) 11:07, 16 May 2014 (UTC)Zee money

We already have subarticles for the different states (such as Indian general election, 2014 (Tamil Nadu), etc), results can be posted there. Do note that this is already a content fork, to avoid having to much detail in Indian general elections, 2014. Better to have all statistics gathered in one place, with the relevant info also available in the state articles. --Soman (talk) 12:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Canvass

Please note the Wikipedia:Indian general election, 2014 progress report, to function as a check-list for updated results in constituency and candidate articles. --Soman (talk) 12:41, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

"Seats won" for the A&N Isles do not make sense

The table:

1

BJP

Name of Party	Vote Share %	Change	Seats won	Changes
Bharatiya Janata Party	47.8%	+3.59	1	+1
Indian National Congress	43.7%	-9.91	1	1

The change for INC is ambiguous. Is it +1 or -1? Or should it be something else entirely? And what does the "1" at the top mean? The number of seats? None of these are clear from the article. It should be edited to explain what these things mean.

Would an editor experienced with the situation please clarify? --Joshua Issac (talk) 12:43, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Coalitions

I re-post a comment of mine from Talk:Indian general election, 2014; "Before the results come out, we need to agree on how we will present them. I noticed that in the past months there has been a tendency to want to describe the election as a contest primarily as a straight contest between NDA and UPA (as seen, for example, in the infobox debate). This is of course true in a sense, it's highly probable that the next Prime Minister would come from either of the two main camps. We could present (a somewhat arbitrary) count of number of MPs that are identified with either of the 2 main blocs. But in terms of vote % and total number of votes, we cannot categorize them by NDA/UPA/Others, as alliances and seat-sharing differs from state to state. Some examples:

• RSP is allied with the Left Front in West Bengal (contesting against Congress), it is allied with Congress through the regional alliance UDF (and thus, albeit indirectly, with UPA in some sense). In Andhra Pradesh it contests without any alliance at all.
• The Naga People's Front is allied with BJP in Nagaland. But it also has candidates outside Nagaland, without any alliance with BJP.
• Shiv Sena is allied with BJP in Maharashtra. But it runs candidates in other parts of the country as well, without any alliance with BJP.
• CPI is in many states allied with CPI(M). But in Telangana it has an alliance with Congress. In Bihar it has an alliance with JD(U). Should the votes for CPI in Telangana count as INC+/UPA votes or as votes for an imaginary 'Third Front' or 'Left Front'? (In Manipur it has an alliance with JD(S), Shiv Sena (!), Bahujan Samaj Party, etc.)
• There is no 'Left Front' at national level. CPI(M), CPI, AIFB and RSP all contest against each other in some constituencies. Not even West Bengal LF and Kerala LDF correspond directly to each other. Nor did any solid 'Third Front' materialize.
• I haven't seen much about it in this election, but RJD used to field candidates outside Bihar as well (where it would, presumably, contest against UPA/INC).
• Another problem is comparisons between 2009 and 2014. These are difficult to do on basis of coalition, as the coalitions fluctuate over time and have no clear membership criteria.

So, in my opinion, the conclusion is that total number of vote, national % percentage and comparison 2009/2014 should be done on basis of party rather than coalition. --Soman (talk) 21:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)" These issues still apply, the current table is quite odd, for example listing CPI(M)+CPI+AIFB as 'Left', and listing RSP as 'UPA' (4 out of 6 RSP candidates contested as part of the Left Front). --Soman (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Complete result, partywise and national

a more comprehensive reference would be http://eci.nic.in/eci_main1/GE2014/Party_Contested_GE_2014.xlsx , with all parties in the fray. --Soman (talk) 15:10, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for providing this reference. I have updated the first table based on this, using 100,000 votes as a cut-off.--obi2canibe^{talk contr} 15:02, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! The table looks much better now. --Soman (talk) 15:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Seat Share Graph

The seat share graphic is wrong. Please correct it.