Talk:Sangrur Assembly constituency

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Punjab portal This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

State vs National election

@SangrurUser I have removed your table and graph that mixed state and National elections. The constituency for both is not the same. Just the name is same. Please dont do mix up like these. If you have done more such mix ups at other places, please remove it yourself. Venkat TL (talk) 11:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: The data I added is available on official ceopunjab website. Constituency is not same, but data for specific “assembly segments” of LS constituencies could be found on official websites. Rather than removing you could have just categorised.SangrurUser (talk) 13:20, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SangrurUser Can you please share the link. The boundaries of the LS Constituency is not the same as AS Constituency . So how are they comparing apples with oranges? Venkat TL (talk) 13:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL:Here is the pdf link, from ceopunjab website.SangrurUser (talk) 13:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Which file to download in link 2? On both links on which page can I find that data and graph you have used? Please read WP:SYNTH before you reply. Venkat TL (talk) 14:49, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL:"Here" means "click here", second link is where i got link from. Also, it’s not me who started the edit war, you removed the data without any discussion, and now removed again even after I added reference with it.SangrurUser (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SangrurUser, yes I clicked there and downloaded the file. On which page can I find the graph you have generated? and that data? Which file do I refer on the CeoPunjab link? You had added this controversial content recently. I have objected it. Please point me to the discussion thread where you have created consensus for it? if you have not created any consensus yet, and I have objected to it, it means you have to discuss and resolve this dispute first before re-adding it back. But you added it back without concluding the discussion first. When you added it back without discussion, that was edit warring, and you started it with your re-addition. Please discuss with an admin if you have doubts regarding who started the edit war. There should be no confusion on this, because if there is doubt, you may make mistake and get blocked. Please dont add it into the article till we reach a conclusion. If you add it again without generating consensus first, then you will have to be reported for Edit warring. Please read WP:BRD to understand the steps. Venkat TL (talk) 15:13, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL:Who said that PDFs can’t be used as source, read Wikipedia:Citing sources.SangrurUser (talk) 15:19, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SangrurUser, where did you read that PDF's can't be used as source? Venkat TL (talk) 15:22, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL:You downloaded the pdf file and yet you are asking?SangrurUser (talk) 15:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I can see that CEO punjab has provided data on assembly segments. But still I dont think we should be reporting it here. Even the number of voters is fluctuating wildly between the LokSabha and VidhanSabha elections. Even the winner is fluctuating as expected. Overall it is misleading for the user to see the General election data on Assembly constituency page. There is a General Election constituency already for this kind of data. Venkat TL (talk) 15:33, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL:We can remove winner candidate, In this case its same anyways. Total number of votes you are talking about increase every year, for every constituency. If we categorise both results, then how will this be misleading?SangrurUser (talk) 15:49, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, what will be the benefit of removing winner canddiate? Total number of votes casted in 2012 gets reduced in 2014, then increased in 2017, again reduced in 2019. This is fluctuating. This kind of data is not added on any other Wikipedia page. This is the first time I am seeing this. and still I cannot find any good reason for keeping it. Venkat TL (talk) 16:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL: We are not analysts here. The data is provided by ECI titled as “Assembly Segment Wise Results”.SangrurUser (talk) 16:08, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SangrurUser we are not obliged to publish everything provided by ECI. You will have to make a case why it is relevant for readers of this page. Venkat TL (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the votes, but there is no relevance for LS election data in assembly article. — DaxServer (talk · contribs) 16:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Venkat TL:, @DaxServer:Almost every constituency article is of stub quality, why can’t we add data to expand them. Also, LS constituencies are made up by adding several VS constituencies.SangrurUser (talk) 01:54, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SangrurUser, please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian politics/Constituencies: Article structure for ideas on how to improve the quality of the article. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]