Talk:2021 Madrilenian regional election

Orphaned references in 2021 Madrilenian regional election
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of 2021 Madrilenian regional election's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ElectionDecree": From 2020 Basque regional election:  From 2021 Catalan regional election:  From 2019 Madrilenian regional election:  From 2020 Galician regional election:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:37, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Why is Iglesias's date of leadership to be confirmed?
The box says that the date of Iglesias being leader is not yet confirmed. Does this mean that he hasn't yet been rubber-stamped as the lead candidate? And when the date is inserted, will this be the date he became lead candidate, or the date he became leader of the entire party? Unknown Temptation (talk) 20:13, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Why is Vox being smeared as "far-right"?
No other party is being labeled as "far-right" or far-left. Not even the truly far-left Podemos with its ties to Communists and the violent terrorist group called "Antifa". Pretty one sided and biased article.

Vox is basically a christian conservative, patriotic party. Left-wing straw man fallacies and personal insults should not be included on wikipedia.

62.226.88.241 (talk) 00:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia reflects what reliable sources say. Reliable sources call Vox far right, so we call Vox far right. Bondegezou (talk) 08:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Municipality-level maps
The municipality maps that are being forced into two of the Madrilenian regional election articles add little to the articles themselves and seem to have no justification aside of one IP user's whimp to have those created and placed here. WP:ILIKEIT, by itself, is not a good enough reason for conducting an edit or for introducing a map. So far:
 * 1) The proposed maps are entirely useless. It's poinless, in terms of the electoral system, who wins at the municipality level in a regional election. Municipality results (and, much less, results at the district-level within a municipality!) have no effect whatsover in the electoral system. None at all. Constituency results have, but in this case the constituency is the whole region, so it is inconsequential.
 * 2) The maps used for Spanish elections in general, both nationwide and regionwide, are based on constituencies. Thus, these edits break both consistency and a well-established norm in place for years, which would require an extensive and throughout justification for it. So far, one has not been given.
 * 3) In past edits, this was justified in how things were done for "London" and "New York". Aside of this being basically a WP:OTHERSTUFF excuse, it shows a tremendous ignorance of the electoral systems applied in each place (nothwithstanding the fact of the attempt to compare municipal/mayoral elections with a regional election):
 * 4) London mayoral elections are not parliamentary elections, but direct elections to an office (which follow the guidelines and customs enforced to presidential elections, not parliamentary/legislative ones). Thus, hardly comparable (though it'd be a good point to consider that the subdivisions within those maps are the constituencies used in the legislative election to the London Assembly, not any division of an inferior level to the constituency).
 * 5) London Assembly elections do show the constituency-level map, not sub-units within the constituency at hand.
 * 6) The exact same is applied to New York.
 * 7) You could also bring many other similar examples where you will find that the norm is to show constituency-level maps in infoboxes, not subunits of inferior level.
 * 8) Nothwithstanding these points of fact, it'd also be a good point to make that maps used throughout Spanish election articles take into account vote strenght in each division. They're not plain depictions of the given winner in a place, which again is a break of the norm and of consistency which has not been justified.

Thus, it's not true that there is much precedent elsewhere in Wikipedia for what is being attempted here. Now, can we (finally!) know what the justification aside from WP:ILIKEIT is? Thanks.  Impru 20 talk 13:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I am totally in favor of including the map. Municipality maps were used many newspapers that covered the election. Even the official results page (from the Community of Madrid website) features a map that's *just* like this one. Just because you think it's non-sensical doesn't mean it is.

Also, cite a break of the norm of 'consistency' in Spanish election articles, but the general election articles feature results by Province (a.k.a. the actual constituencies), *and* results for the Autonomous Communities, which are not constituencies.

As long as the map is well sourced I have no problem with it. --yeah_93 (talk) 18:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, and you could also find maps featuring sub-municipality divisions if you wish as well. That doesn't mean it is a good pick for a Wikipedia election article. You can find municipality results map for every election in Spain and in the world, but they are still not used unless there is a good reason to do so. Thus so far, your argument doesn't deviate from the "hey, I like it and I think it is cool to add it"-sort of argument which I've criticized, and you are not contesting any actual argument of the ones I brought, aside of the 'consistency' one by citing how Spanish general election articles use supra-constituency divisions in addition to the constituency ones (remind you that you are arguing in favour of adding a sub-constituency map in a regional election article which would be used as the sole map). Any similarity in your comparisons would be mere coincidence.  Impru 20 talk 19:11, 16 May 2021 (UTC)


 * We have ward-level results breakdowns for the London Mayoral elections, along with constituency and borough level breakdowns. It makes sense to show where in a city a party gathers it's support. There's no real reason why not to provide that kind of information. --RaviC (talk) 13:30, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * In infoboxes? I think not. Bringing it down to "There's no real reason why not to provide that kind of information" would make the "There's no real reason why to provide that kind of information"-argument equally valid, which would amount to a WP:ILIKEIT v. WP:IDONTLIKEIT dispute. Besides, wards are actual electoral subdivisions of which an equivalent does not exist in Spain. It may be customary practice for some specific electoral races in the world (mostly presidential-like races) to show such a degree of detail in the maps, but that does not apply to the specific case of parliamentary elections in Spain, where the territorial figure of reference is the constituency.  Impru 20 talk 15:02, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree that such maps are not appropriate for an infobox, but they could be used lower in an article (if they are well sourced and match what reliable sources do) because it is of psephological interest where a party's vote is concentrated even if the distribution has no electoral significance. Bondegezou (talk) 15:19, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Madrid instead of "Madrilenian"
Madrilenian as toponomy is not very recognized, yet unpopular. I think it should be just Madrid instead of Madrilenian Carel3DS (talk) 13:23, 7 October 2022 (UTC)