Talk:1991 Polish parliamentary election

Returning to using TILE for this election
Considering the amount of parties which actually had gained seats (due to the lack of a threshold), this election is probably the one that could most use TILE as opposed to TIE. To justify it beyond just having a lot of parties winning seats, this is also the only fully democratic election which had no threshold in post-communist Polish history. The TILE infobox was already made but reverted, I propose returning to the TILE infobox. @Impru20 @Czello @Number 57 Polish kurd (talk) 20:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * It seems a no brainer to me, As demonstrated to the left, the full results of the election (both Sejm and Senate) can be displayed in a smaller space using TILE than the Sejm results for only nine parties using TIE. For this particular election, ten parties won double digit number of seats in the Sejm and there is no clear cut off. However, as Poland elects the Sejm and Senate at the same time, this is the best way of presenting the election results of both houses in a compact fashion and should be applied to all post-communist elections IMO. Number   5  7  21:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I see the large fragmentation as the only issue here. TIE can accommodate both Sejm and Senate results, and correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Sejm the chamber that has more power than the Senate? Tyypically, in cases of imperfect bicameralism, only the results of the more powerful house are shown in the infobox (but this depends on each case).
 * Paradoxically, the number of relevant parties in this election is nine: from ten onwards they are too small. This is a somewhat extreme case but it's an exception, not the rule, for elections in Poland, and TIE can still accommodate this (and obviously the other post-Communism elections). I am more worried that the article's space is currently 80% occuppied by results tables (and the remainder is the infobox and the lead section). This should be expanded in content (which can be done, as the Polish wiki article shows). Maybe that should be given more effort? We spend years discussing about how much space does the infobox occupy and very little in actually improving almost empty articles.
 * Btw, I don't like this practice that examples are put on the very same talk page where discussion is taking place. We seemingly want to display infoboxes in a smaller space but we end up cluttering talk pages with examples...  Impru 20 talk 21:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I am a proponent of using TIE in all elections after this one, since they did implement a threshold.
 * In this case, many of the parties DO matter, some participated in coalition governments (for example PPPP), and I believe UPR began lustration proceedings.
 * I'm only a proponent of using TILE if there is no threshold. If the threshold is ever abolished again, I believe TILE could be used in those future elections, though I suppose the matter would be discussed again in that case.
 * As for expanding content, I am trying my best to improve that, as I did with the 1990 Polish presidential election, but the matter of infoboxes is still important. I'm trying to edit interwar era infoboxes up to standard: 1922, 1928.
 * Not sure how adding the Senate from the infobox is harmful, sometimes it's actually very important, like 2019, where PiS lost its majority in the Senate. Polish kurd (talk) 23:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't agree that we should use TIE or TILE depending on whether there is a threshold (in many countries there is no national threshold and Poland 1991-like results are rare; even in Poland itself this is quite rare). But I accept your reasoning.
 * Government participation is not necessarily a requisite for being in the infobox. It can help, but it ultimately comes to parliamentary representation (and parties getting 1 seat are not at the same level of prominence than parties scoring first, second or third).
 * On article content, this was a general complain, not specifically aimed at you. For many years there has been lots of discussions on election articles' infoboxes and comparatively less on actual content, which infoboxes are meant to summarize (to the point that some articles with almost no content other than results tables become hotbeds of edit warring over the infobox style, which is absurd).
 * What's the actual power of the Senate? According to its article: Poland's parliament is asymmetric, where the lower chamber is dominant over the upper chamber. Unlike the Sejm, the Senate cannot unilaterally veto legislation nor can it bring down the government in a vote of no confidence, and the chamber and its members generally receive far less attention compared to the Sejm. If this is the case, then it is not that important (compared to the Sejm). It is not particularly harmful and can be accomodated into TIE if ultimately needed, but the role of each chamber and the focus that local (and English) media give to each is relevant. Typically, customary practice across Wikipedia has been to show results for both chambers when the chambers' powers are more symmetric.  Impru 20 talk 23:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I would say the reason why 1991-like results are rare is single-handedly because of the threshold - without the threshold, the number of historically relevant parties in the 1993 Polish parliamentary election would have doubled, from 7 to 14. Otherwise this can kind of fragmentation can occur, and still occurs at local elections like the 2024 Polish local elections (specifically when it comes to gmina councils).
 * As for the Senate, it is true that Polish bicameralism is quite asymmetric and vests way more power in the Sejm than the Senate. There are papers that argue that it plays an important role though - Participation of the Polish Senate in the Legislative Process: Towards Equal Bicameralism? by Sławomir Patyra (DOI: 10.17951/sil.2022.31.5.187-199) writes:
 * "In the circumstances of a kind of “Sejm dictatorship” of the coalition having the majority since the 2015 parliamentary elections, manifesting itself, among other things, in a gross restriction of the opposition’s participation in the parliamentary decision-making process, the Senate once again seems to be a “Chamber of democratic resistance” to the undemocratic standards pursued in the Sejm. This is a kind of phenomenon, given that, following the free and democratic elections to the Sejm in 1991, it seemed that this function would become history. In view of the progressing erosion of democratic principles of lawmaking at the level of the Sejm legislative process and the disappearance of institutional review of constitutionality of the law, due to the subordination of the Constitutional Tribunal to political power, the Senate today plays the role of both a guardian of the Constitution and a protector of the quality of lawmaking in line with the standards of a democratic state ruled by law."
 * I would say the Senate should be included since it can play an important role in the Polish legislation, as it did during the Polish constitutional crisis.
 * Lastly, when it comes to TILE vs. TIE, I very much think that TILE should indeed be applied to this election, as per @Polish kurd's recommendation. Brat Forelli🦊  01:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)