Jump to content

Talk:Walsall and Bloxwich (UK Parliament constituency)

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

2024 election results: differences between sources

[edit]

I'm confused by the slight differences in numbers that I see on different sources, and I'm not sure which should go in the article. (This also relates to a question I asked last month at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics_of_the_United_Kingdom#Inclusion_of_rejected_ballot_figures_in_results_tables, after the local elections, about how I believe that election results tables should include rejected ballot figures where available, in order for turnout percentages to accurately match those on the declaration of results document.)

Below are the numbers I see on these three sources:

Caption
Council PDF Council web page BBC Sky
Registered electors 74,951 74,951 75,968 75,958
Valid votes 37,191 37,191 37,191 37,191
Rejected ballots 141 141 Not listed Not listed
Total Valid + Rejected 37,332 37,332 N/A N/A
Ballot papers issued 37,336 Not listed Not listed Not listed
2024 turnout 49.81% 46% 49% 49%
My calculated turnout from above figures (37,332 / 74,951) = 49.81% (37,332 / 74,951) = 49.81% (37,191 / 75,968) = 48.96%
2019 turnout in Walsall North 36,556 valid votes / 67,177 reg. voters = 54.4% [1]
Turnout change since 2019 (vs Walsall North) -11.90%


Things that caught my eye:

  • The three different numbers of registered electors between the Council, the BBC, and Sky.
  • The sum of valid votes + invalid ballots gives 37,332, but the PDF says 37,336. What might cause this difference of 4? (Maybe postal votes that were sent out to people, but not returned and counted?)
  • The 46% turnout figure that's shown on the council website doesn't match anything else.
  • Assuming that the BBC's turnout change is based on a comparison to Walsall North (UK Parliament constituency) (I think they are, since they treat it as a Labour gain from Conservative), I can't see how they get a turnout change of -11.90% since 2019?
    • A change from 36,556 valid votes to 37,191 valid votes is an increase of +1.74%.
    • A change from 54.4% turnout to 49% turnout is a change of (49-54.4)/54.4*100 = -9.93%.
    • And if you treat it as a change in percentage points, 54.4% turnout to 49.0% is -5.4 points.

So, with all these minor differences - which numbers should be used for the article?

I believe that the other Walsall seat Aldridge-Brownhills (UK Parliament constituency), has similar discrepancies (though I haven't really looked into that in much detail). Nick RTalk 21:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: Regarding the BBC's comparisons to 2019, I looked again at How the BBC reports this election, and it looks like its results are not a direct comparison of Walsall North (2019) -> Walsall and Bloxwich (2024), but are instead based on notional 2019 results with the new boundaries. That explains why they're treating it as a Labour gain, and might also be how they're getting the strange percentage change in turnout. (I see a similar disclaimer on The Guardian's election map: "New constituency. Change figures based on modelled 2019 results.") Which raises the question: with a renamed constituency with major boundary changes like this, should Wikipedia articles follow the BBC when it comes to listing party gains/holds, and using notional figures to compare turnouts and swings? Should that be done even if, as in this case, the BBC's results for 2024 contain some figures (e.g. registered voters) that don't match what the Council's own announcement says? Nick RTalk 23:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Council's results web page has been updated at some point in the last few days, so that the turnout percentage figures now match the PDF. Nick RTalk 19:24, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Walsall_and_Bloxwich_(UK_Parliament_constituency)&oldid=1233566767"