Talk:1919 German federal election

USPD figure likely wrong
There's a big discrepancy between the number of USPD delegates given in this article (65) and the number given at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstagswahl_1919; and at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Mitglieder_der_Nationalversammlung_von_1919. It is 22 in both of these, and in most sources. SamEV 12:14, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Is federal really correct?
Was the Weimar Republic really a federal state? Didn't the use of the wording 'federal' (for 'national') begin with BRD? --Soman (talk) 15:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * 1. Yes, I think so. 2. I don't know - the Weimar Republic didn't have "federal" in their name as the BRD/FRG, but that need not mean much. The 1919 election was for the "Nationalversammlung", which would best translate to "National Assembly" IMO (their task was to draft a new constitution.) --Roentgenium111 (talk) 16:49, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Results table
Why do you find the re-made results table "Awful in so many ways"? Compared to the previous tables, it is more informative (by both having party colors, and by adding the parties abbreviations), and it is more accurate (by including footnotes about votes in some constituencies, and by marking the Center Party as the CVP (which it was at the time)), while not removing anything from the previous table (except parties with less than 0.05%, which can be found in the source anyway). Julio 9 7 4 ◆ (Talk-Contribs) 07:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * A brief list of reasons why it was awful:
 * Numbers were wrongly aligned in every column (either left-aligned or centre-aligned rather than right-aligned)
 * Unnecessary bolding of the SPD row
 * Notes added to votes column making it unnecessarily wide
 * Half the parties unnecessarily removed from the table and grouped in 'other' (why wouldn't we want readers to see the full results?)
 * I don't think the acronyms are necessary in the table
 * Unnecessary bolding of valid/invalid/registered voters row
 * Turnout incorrectly placed in total row (meaning total of 99.59 and 0.41 appeard to be 0.41 whereas Registered voters row had a 100% figure in it
 * Source moved to a heading reference rather than displayed at the foot of the table as normal
 * With regards to the Centre Party, you added a link to Christian People's Party (Germany), but it was actually the Centre Party running under another name, and so has simply been listed as the Centre Party going back to 2005.
 * Anyway, I have edited the table to use the Election results format, which sets out the results in a standardised format, and has the party colours. I've also readded a note under the table regarding the Centre Party, DDP and DNVP totals in a way that doesn't mess up the votes column. Cheers, Number   5  7  12:50, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Christian Social Party?
How was the Christian Social PArty able to participate in this election when its own wiki page says, that the party was dissolved in November 1918 so a few weeks before the election and that most former members joined the DNVP? So either this info is wrong, or the party in the 1919 election was another party with the same name (coincidence) or the remnants of the party. this has to be clarified Moctezuma1466 (talk) 12:31, 18 May 2023 (UTC)