Jump to content

Talk:June 2015 Turkish general election

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

The numbers

[edit]

what is it: 311 or 265?Ericl (talk) 12:31, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

districts

[edit]

Where can i see map of Majorities according to districts?--Kaiyr (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Am I Not Suprised

[edit]

Wow! How quickly a detailed article about a loss for the Justice and Development Party (AKP) forms! Why don't these contributors show the same sensitivity with other topics related to AKP's projects and its successes? Paid agents... -Dominator1453 (talk) 06:49, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paid agents? Haha... I have two words for you: AK Trolls. Classic AKP banter... excuses, paranoia, accusations that sound like they've been made with a mentality of a 10 year old and yet no proof. Me and a few others worked on this article both before and after the election results (i,e, the AKP's loss) were announced, so if you're commending our quick and detailed editing that has created such a well-covered article in a short period of time, well then thank you. It just so happens that the elections are a contemporary topic and a recent event... maybe that's why this article has been formed so quickly? Sounds a bit more plausible than us being paid agents, doesn't it? Rather than making childish accusations about other people who have given a lot of their time to develop this and other articles, how about you go and edit articles about topics 'related to AKP's projects and its successes'? You're an editor like us... Nub Cake (talk) 08:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and also, if you actually do find a bit of this article where it does seem biased against the AKP, either edit it or raise it here on the talk page to reach consensus. A paid agent will subsequently deal with your request. Nub Cake (talk) 08:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, did I say paid agent? I meant biased editors. Sound better? :) Rather than take offense at my "childish accusations" you can try making the effort at being impartial: I have yet to see you put in the same peculiar effort in other AK related articles. Thank you for your efforts. But my point still stands. -Dominator1453 (talk) 08:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you feel that there are AK related articles that need improving, then by all means improve them yourself. Also, editing an article about an election where a party has performed poorly but not editing an article about that party itself isn't bias. These elections are topical at the moment, that is why it has been extensively developed. Not because the AKP has done badly in it. If you are genuinely concerned over the lack of editing on other AK related articles, list a few of them here and I'll take a look at ones that I find interesting and see whether I can add anything. Nub Cake (talk) 09:08, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thank you for reaching out to come to an understanding and an agreement. Please note that my original reaction was probably due to my witnessing a lack of help in the past. I am truely busy with work. Will point out some articles that can use your valuable support as I come across them again. -Dominator1453 (talk) 09:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I am against MOST of the views on your page, but that's beside the point. -Dominator1453 (talk) 09:29, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please refer to Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a forum and WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Every editor in wikipedia has her/his right to focus on specific article(s), you may not judge their opinions or edits with hostility like and before you talk about others attitude towards something, you should take a look at your attitude, you are a classic AK Troll. kazekagetr 09:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments. I am entitled to my opinion as much as you or anybody else is. Please do not be offended by mine when I mention them as well. You should check out other policies of Wikipedia about name calling as I am sure you know all about it. -Dominator1453 (talk) 10:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've checked though your edit history but didn't find anything specifically AK related. We can, if you like, begin translating this article about the AKP-Gulen fight into English since I keep finding myself referring to it but there is no actual English wiki article about it. Also, having called the good contributors to this article 'paid agents' because of their detailed and quick editing, you are hardly the one to lecture others on name calling ;) Nub Cake (talk) 11:15, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great idea, but I am in the middle of translating other works (outside of Wikipedia). Let's be fair, the Blue Tunnel Project, Turkish Engine Center, and TAI Anka are all projects I made edits on recently, and they were developed within the rule of the AKP, the last 12-13 years.
Yes, I agree. However, the matter was concerning us and a third person interrupted. You know about our Turkish idiom, "İki kişi konuşurken üçüncüye..." :) -[User:Dominator1453|Dominator1453]] (talk) 11:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you called that third person a 'paid agent'... I think it's only natural that they responded to that claim. I appeared to have missed those articles on your edit history, but they are hardly to do with Turkish politics. I have no in depth knowledge about tunnels or planes, so what do you want me to do? Add a bit to those pages saying 'by the way, the AKP made this'? My interest is Turkish politics, which is why I tend to edit these articles. So if you do find an underdeveloped Turkish politics article about the AKP, please notify me. I will also have a look at those articles about the tunnel etc and see whether there is a political aspect I could add, for example about the government contracts given to construction companies and planning etc... But don't get mad if I research it and find that those projects are riddled with corruption claims ;) Nub Cake (talk) 15:12, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, seems like we have different areas of interest. Too bad. I was going to ask for help regarding the Turkish regional jet project. Please go ahead and research any corruption claims and enlighten everybody if you find any. We all know the state of affairs in Turkey before the AKP reign, full of corruption, and corruption now minimalized. It is unfortunately a developing country. Not that the UK or the US has a clean plate regarding corruption either. -Dominator1453 (talk) 10:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Corruption now minimalised? Oh dear... :D. I'll have a look at the regional jet project. In the meantime, please enjoy the picture below. Nub Cake (talk) 11:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

There are far too many images in this article, please remove and keep relavent.--XELO 01:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xelophate (talk • contribs)

Conflict

[edit]

There is a conflict between the two sideboxes; Infobox election and 2015 Turkish general election sidebar. The number of sets is 256 for AKP and 82 for HDP in the first case and 258 and 82 respectively in the second case. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey election

[edit]

For me it is more confusing. I searched many articles but none gave the clear picture. Let me say, W Party got 15% of votes in turkey (whole turkey). Based on electoral system it will get nn (80) seats. But it did not get majority in any single seat or electoral district. Which seat will be represented by this party's members? What about Independents who won seats? Is it not distributed to any Party?--Kurumban (talk) 14:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For the election system see D'Hondt method. The main issue is the overall 10% limit. Parties below this limit are not qualified to gain even one seat no matter how high their percentage in any one electoral district may be. For the independents there is no limit . For example a party which received 90% in an electoral district and 9% in all country fails to gain even one seat. In the very same district an independent who received a modest 30% may be elected. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 17:07, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seat change

[edit]

Template:Infobox election defines "Seat change" as "The change in the number of seats won at the election compared to the previous election." In some countries, such as UK, this definition is not followed and the comparison is made against the seats before the election, rather than seats in the previous election. This makes sense for those countries that have single-member district, because they have the notion of each seat being connected to a constituency and therefore there is such a thing as a party keeping a seat, or losing it to a different party. This doesn't apply to other countries with large electoral districts. There, the comparison is always made against the previous election, as that is the measure of the party's success compared to the previous election. Indeed, comparing it to the seats before the election doesn't make sense because, unlike countries with single-member districts, seats are often vacated in most countries and are not filled until the next election, so the number of MPs is lower at the end of the term, which would make it appear that parties increased their seats, even when they actually did not. E.g. in this case, CHP's number of MPs actually decreased in the election, but the infobox makes it appear as if it increased, which is partly because some CHP MPs resigned to become mayors in the 2014 local elections. Similarly, the losses of the AKP is more dramatic than the infobox currently indicates: AKP lost 69 MPs, whereas the infobox indicate. I guess this was made because someone with more familiarity with the UK elections contributed the article the most. I propose to correct it and change the numbers in accordance with the definition. Also see other countries' election infoboxes, they also obey the definition, e.g. German federal election, 2013, French legislative election, 2012, etc. Actually, like in those pages, it would be best to remove the "Seats before" line. It is very relevant to UK elections and countries with similar systems, but not to others. That info is already available in the Parliamentary composition subsection.--Orwellianist (talk) 08:33, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Turkish general election, June 2015. 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 15:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Turkish general election, June 2015. 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) 04:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:22, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:June_2015_Turkish_general_election&oldid=1212504226"