Talk:2018 Zimbabwean general election

Women's seats

The House has 270 members incl. 60 elected on the women's quota, so both the image and the number is wrong. We still lack women's quota info for two provinces (Masvingo and Matabeleland South). It's pointless to have percentages of seats, it should be of votes.--Batmacumba (talk) 10:03, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Divided parties

It's the MDC-T faction led by Thokozani Khuphe that has won both a seat in the Senate and a seat on the women's quota in Bulawayo, that should be clarified to avoid confusion as the other MDC-T faction under Chamisa is the main player in the MDC Alliance. The two factions are currently involved in a court battle over the name. likewise it's important to clarify that it's the NPF faction aligned with the Mugabe family that has won a constituency seat in the National Assembly, and not the one led by Rt. General Ambrose Mutinhiri. The general ran for president while the Mugabe aligned NPF faction endorsed Chamisa.--Batmacumba (talk) 10:59, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

It seems to have already been clarified in the article but in any case I don't think the faction led by Khuphe should be referred to as the MDC-T mainly because as documented on this encyclopedia, Chamisa is the leader of the MDC-T while Khuphe is currently listed as the deputy. At the very least there should be some sort of annotation or mention when MDC-T is referred to that we are talking about Khuphe's faction of the party and not the entirety MDC-T party. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 09:45, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

That is not the current status (basically anything on Wiki about Zimbabwe politics is outdated). The Khupe wing considers itself the official MDC-T and Chamisa an usurper. She was elected president of her branch of the party at an extraordinary congress in April: http://www.thezimbabwemail.com/main/khupe-unveils-new-look-mdc-t-leadership-at-extraordinary-congress/ Right now the courts have not yet decided on who has the right to the party name, which is why the Khupe faction could use it in the election. The courts may very well find against the Chhamisa wing, and Chamisa has implied they will introduce a new name.--Batmacumba (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

House of Assembley

If the house of assembly only has 210 seats how on Earth have we managed to get 270 seats? Do we not count the Women or something when we refer to the assembly being made up of 210 seats or have constituency boundaries changed meaning that the MDC-T and ZANU-PF totals need to be updated on their respective pages? Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 09:51, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

What do you mean? The House has 270 members. It's just that a lot of media seem to only refer to the 210 constituency seats/common seats when they mention the election. "The Constitution of Zimbabwe provides for the election of 350 Members of Parliament. Parliament consists of the Senate and the National Assembly and each has 80 and 270 Members of Parliament respectively. Members of Parliament perform legislative, representative and oversight functions. They are elected for a 5 year term which runs from the date on which the President-Elect is sworn in and assumes office. Parliament stands dissolved at midnight on the day before the first polling day in the next general election." http://www.parlzim.gov.zw/members-of-parliament/members --Batmacumba (talk) 11:53, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

What I mean is Wikipedia has only ever documented the 210 seats on the parties' pages which don't include the Women so I was slightly confused when I initially saw 270 counted on this page. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Senate

The election results of the senate do not state any seats gained by MDC-T, wheras the reference states such a seat in Bulawayo province (it has incorrectly been added to the number of seats of the MDC Alliance). --Vanellus (talk) 18:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

It has previously been correct, but someone had changed it. There are too many people working this article, who don't really know anything about Zimbabwean politics and that means that errors keep getting reinserted. I have corrected it now, but the color code still needs fixing.--Batmacumba (talk) 20:41, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Wrong Numbers

The numbers don't add up. 52.4% ZANU-PF, 34.3% MDF and 34.3% Independents = 121%!2A02:120B:C3FB:38D0:60B7:583F:78F4:AF44 (talk) 08:24, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

What are you talking about? There is no double entry of the number 34.3% and no MDF. What "independents" are you referring to?--Batmacumba (talk) 10:03, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant MDC 2A02:120B:C3FB:38D0:ACF4:4A6E:CEA4:A8DC (talk) 18:11, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Not really the important part. What numbers are you talking about??--Batmacumba (talk) 18:59, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

I suppose he mean the votes to the House of Assembly. --Aréat (talk) 01:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay, the numbers for independent have been inserted after I put in the ones for the parties. They are clearly wrong, so I will remove them.--Batmacumba (talk) 04:00, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, that was my fault. When I compiled the results, I just copied the independents figure from the wrong line. Number 57 09:24, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Votes number

According with this source, Mnangagwa would have got 2,460,463 votes, and this result corresponds to the sum of the votes that Mnangagwa would have got in each province. However, considering the official results that have been indicated here (zec.org), we can verify that the number of votes that has been indicated for each province in that source is not correct: for example, Mashonaland Central: 359.576 votes, and not 366.785. And if we sum the votes (obtained by Mnangagwa) that have been indicated in zec.org, the result is the same that has been indicated here (www.thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/inline/Zimbabwe 2018 COG Report - Final.pdf, page 75) --151 cp (talk) 14:05, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@151 cp: Are you saying the ZBC results are wrong and we should use the ZEC/Commonwealth ones instead? Number 57 19:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: On the page kubatana.net, we read: "Click on the name of the province to download an Excel file of ZEC's official presidential results for that province, by polling station". So, the ZBC results too are based on the results that have been published by ZEC. But the results that ZEC has subsequently published, don't correspond to those. I saw metadata concerning the files that have been published by ZEC: last edit, 30 August (the results of ZBC are based on the results published by the same ZEC, but on 3 August). --151 cp (talk) 19:43, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@151 cp: OK, so shall we go with the later results? Number 57 19:47, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: I think we shall consider the later results. On the other hand, we haven't any official summary of the results, so we are "forced" to add up the provincial results, and the same ZEC corrected itself publishing different results about those. --151 cp (talk) 19:56, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@151 cp: I've added the results and used the Commonwealth report as the source – I think we can consider it a reliable secondary source. Number 57 21:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@Number 57: I've created a summary by province according with the last results of ZEC, so that we can verify that the results published by the Commonwealth report correspond to those published by the electoral commission. --151 cp (talk) 00:15, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Emmerson Mnangagwa Official Portrait.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• Nelson chamisa.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

CSS cropping in the Infobox

@Number 57: On the right, you can see how the infobox looks without CSS cropping on top, and with it on the bottom. On the top version, at least on my screen, you can see that the images do not fill out their areas. You can see that neither image is wide enough to match the coloured bars below them. Neither image is the same ratio, with the image on the left being wider than the one on the right. Using CSS cropping, as shown on the bottom, now both images fill out their image area, and both are uniform in shape and size. You're asking why they're so big; I made them the same size as 2020 United States Presidential election's infobox images, which is also a presidential election with 2 candidates. If you want the images to be smaller, they can be altered to be smaller without removing the CSS cropping. In fact, that's one of the major benefits of CSS cropping; that you can radically alter the size and shape of images without having to "hard crop" them on the commons. You've said before that CSS cropping adds "unneeded complexity" to an infobox; Images in infoboxes do not change frequently, so they're not something new users need to be altering regularly. But if they do want to alter them, it's normally a simple matter of changing the file name. The additional cropping details are only for images that are well outside the usual 3:4 or 2:3 dimensions.

Can we come to some understanding on this issue of CSS cropping? CeltBrowne (talk) 15:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

If you stop making the images larger than the default size of 150 height, I wouldn't have an issue. The problem is that in the vast majority of occasions I see you doing this, you are making the size different to the defined/default sizes. Number 57 16:11, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I typically use 160x120 because that's the format used on 2020 New Zealand general election, which is where I first saw CSS cropping being employed. I took that to be the standard. I can just as easily use 150x113. If size is the only issue, I'll just typically use 150x113. Sometimes I'll have to something other than 150x113 because on occasion election maps can interfere with the CSS cropping. CeltBrowne (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Inclusion

Two users think that mentioning a film is promoting it. If the information provided is only in one source, in this case a movie which won a prestigious award, then it should be included in the article. The movie, President refers to the controversial 2018 election. The information has to do with the facts of the election. Fraud is alleged; the film backs up the accusations. Further facts seem to be supportive. For example there were delays in counting the votes. The two users who seem to have been on this site a while appear to be confused.Extraordinary2 (talk) 00:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

You're clearly on Wikipedia to try and promote the film. Number 57 10:24, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

No, you are using assumptions. I guess you like Heinz ketchup since you have 57.Extraordinary2 (talk) 10:47, 13 August 2022 (UTC)