Talk:2016 United States presidential election in Utah

s

This is one of the few states where one of the two major parties might not win. But its Johnson or McMullin who have a chance, not those other two folks. The WikiEditor who keeps supressing the McMullin picture isn't really following the story. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/12/a-new-poll-shows-a-tie-in-utah-be-skeptical-be-amazed/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cranky1000 (talk • contribs) 16:41, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Will Soros company run the online voting (primary, causus) ???
Check this article out: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/20/soros-board-member-chairs-firm-running-online-balloting-for-tuesdays-utah-caucuses/ AstroU (talk) 17:54, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring
Both of you need to discuss here instead of just reverting. --Neil N  talk to me 20:26, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello.That is exactly what I've tried to do, but after multiple requests, there is no admin to resolve the dispute and actually judge the whole discussion.  Ali   21:32, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * That discussion is hopelessly compromised. Start a proper RFC, don't canvass, and go from there. --Neil N  talk to me 21:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * This the whole discussion that we had before that RfC, but still no user really stepped in and didn't helped us to resolve the dispute. Ali   21:44, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, please start a proper RFC or use WP:DRN. --Neil N  talk to me 21:46, 8 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Another good alternative is to just accept that even though you can have a treemap on this series of articles, and those treemaps can show county-level results, you don't get total control of every treemap on every article in the series. You might not be able to treat these articles like a Pintrist board or a Flickr group where everyone gets to post their own version of the same thing. You might not get to insist that every county-level treemap be in your preferred style. You might not get to be the only editor who creates these treemaps. Everyone, including you, gets to contribute. You did that. Now another editor is taking your contribution, and changing it. There were errors in the data and the style did a poor job of illustrating the 2016 vote in Utah. I made a version of your addition, and you started an edit war by reverting my changes. You have been unable to accept the idea that your contributions can be modified by others. "You have no right to touch my work" is how you put it. You then continued that edit war by reverting three more times. Which brings us to here. No matter what else happens, whether you start another RfC over this very small difference, you're still going to have to accept that others can touch your work. It's not yours any more after you contribute it to Wikipedia.--Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:18, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It is very funny the way you portrait me. You portrait me as someone who claims to own the articles, while in reality, it is exactly opposite. Dennis, you need to accept Wikipedia is a voluntary community. Simply because you don't like something, you cannot start doing edit war and cannot do whatever you want. Instead of being an accuser, bullying users who have fewer number of edits than yours, doing edit wars, and starting disputes, help to improve the encyclopedia. Remember Wikipedia is not your own website, which means you don't own the pages, and anyone allows to edit articles (as far as they don't put wrong information).  Ali   03:28, 9 March 2017 (UTC)