Talk:Winner-take-all system
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
National elections
[edit]"Nowadays, at-large majoritarian representation is no longer used for national elections," - what, so UK general elections using FPTP are not considered national?!
This page is all wrong. All the voting systems where you have only one persone elected per constituency are Majoritarian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.35.244 (talk) 13:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Majoritarian representation. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110625044436/http://acm.uva.es/p/v4/435.html to http://acm.uva.es/p/v4/435.html
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) 16:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Majoritarian representation vs. majoritarian-at-large vs majority rule
[edit]Doing a major rework to update this page to be a good overview of all systems commonly referred to as majoritarian, not just at-large (block voting), so it can be a counterpart on the level of the article on Proportional representation. As it is called majoritarian representation, it should focus on multi-member systems (one or more multi-winner districts or multiple single winner districts) where the winner takes all in a district, with the appropriate references to single-winner majority or plurality rule systems and multi-winner systems that use the plurality or majority rule but provide semi-proportional represenation (limited voting, sntv, etc) Rankedchoicevoter (talk) 21:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Rankedchoicevoter my suggestion would be to try and find anything salvageable in this article and transfer that into the articles on single-member districts and block voting. Then we can turn this into a disambiguation page (since "majoritarian" is variously used to mean majority rule, Condorcet methods, single-member districts, and block voting). –Sincerely, A Lime 19:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- I created disambiguation "majoritarian electoral system" to start. I think this article should still exists in some form, it is one of the two major types of electoral systems referred to most commonly, cannot be just split up. But it could be renamed winner-take-all, unfortunately, most commonly it is referred to as majoritarian instead. Rankedchoicevoter (talk) 09:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Nothing wrong with having a page on winner-take-all that mentions this is called "majoritarian representation" in some subfields (which it is). If you think there's enough material for an article here (instead of just a disambiguation page), that seems fine. I'd agree winner-take-all is a better name because it's unambiguous, though we should mention the same idea is sometimes called "majoritarian representation".–Sincerely, A Lime 17:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- I created disambiguation "majoritarian electoral system" to start. I think this article should still exists in some form, it is one of the two major types of electoral systems referred to most commonly, cannot be just split up. But it could be renamed winner-take-all, unfortunately, most commonly it is referred to as majoritarian instead. Rankedchoicevoter (talk) 09:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Article seems to miss mark plurality (FPTP) is where no regard for whether winner has majority or minority of votes majoritarian systems IMO is where winner must have majority of votes IRV PR is where multiple parties are represented in district (whatever district or pooling is used) and majority of votes are used to elect the winners.
the statement "A majoritarian electoral system is an electoral system where the candidates or parties with the most votes takes all seats (in a district) using the winner-takes-all principle and in this way provides majoritarian representation." all proper election systems do this: "the candidates or parties with the most votes" are elected what is winner-take-all if not FPTP? and if FPTP it is not necessarily majoritarian. better to try to sort out election system by whether elect multiple or single members and then where single members elected, for each whether plurality or majoritarian is used, and for multiple members whether plurality or majoritarian or PR is used. If we call FPTP majoritarian does not leave opening for a term to describe diff between IRV and FPTP. Under FPTP, often the majority of votes are not used to elect the winner, so it is not majoritarian consistently.
Introduction
[edit]The introduction to this article is extremely long and rambling, going into far more detail than an introduction should - and, for me, is quite difficult to understand. I wonder if the bits which compare it to other voting systems should be turned into a section in the article? Unfortunately I don't know enough about the subject to be confident about doing it right. Knole Jonathan (talk) 17:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
I have tried worked on it since Rankedchoicevoter (talk) 18:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
FPTP is not majoritarian
[edit]Article seems to miss mark plurality (FPTP) is where no regard for whether winner has majority or minority of votes
majoritarian systems IMO is where winner must have majority of votes IRV
PR is where multiple parties are represented in district (whatever district or pooling is used) and majority of votes are used to elect the winners.
the statement "A majoritarian electoral system is an electoral system where the candidates or parties with the most votes takes all seats (in a district) using the winner-takes-all principle and in this way provides majoritarian representation." all proper election systems do this: "the candidates or parties with the most votes" are elected what is winner-take-all if not FPTP? and if FPTP it is not necessarily majoritarian. better to try to sort out election system by whether elect multiple or single members and then where single members elected, for each whether plurality or majoritarian is used, and for multiple members whether plurality or majoritarian or PR is used.
If we call FPTP majoritarian, that does not leave opening for a term to describe diff between IRV and FPTP.
Under FPTP, often the majority of votes are not used to elect the winner, so it is not majoritarian consistently. 2604:3D09:8880:11E0:0:0:0:7044 (talk) 20:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)