Talk:2022 Oklahoma House of Representatives election

Orphaned references in 2022 Oklahoma House of Representatives 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 2022 Oklahoma House of Representatives 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 "August Runoff Results": From 2022 Oklahoma State Treasurer election:  From 2022 Oklahoma elections:  

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 ⚡ 13:10, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect quantitative results
the quantitative election results thta you added to this article are almost all incorrect and do not match the numbers given at the source you provided. Can you explain this discrepancy? Is there a reason this misinformation shouldn't be immediately removed? -- Mikeblas (talk) 02:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Remember WP:GOODFAITH. My guess is the changes in the results is from the shift in unofficial results to official results. When I initially posted results, the results were the unofficial results released by the state. Since I copied results, the state has certified the results and updated the page I had cited. You might also check the edit history for intervening edits. I could have also just made a copying error with the results.
 * Can you specify which results are wrong so they can be corrected? TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 02:58, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Almost all are incorrect. Comparing the results in the article to the results in the link reveals discrepancies for nearly every race. -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "Almost all" doesn't give me anything to work with unless you expect me to check and update each result personally, which I do not have the time to do right now. WP is collaborative and you're welcome to update the results yourself if you've found discrepancies. If you're wanting me to personally fix it, it might be a little bit before I have time to sit down and rewrite the largest section of the article. Alternatively, since you've already taken the time to check the citations for result discrepancies, you could list them so other editors (and myself) can start correcting those results. Clearly identifying the exact scope of the problem is a good starting point for fixing it. Just to be totally clear, I agree that the results should be updated to match the official results released by the state and thank you for catching the errors and flagging them. What I don't understand is why you're tagging me instead of just updating and fixing the information. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 15:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I didn't think the errors were that hard to spot, and so pervasive that listing the problems would take longer than fixing them. Oddly, it looks like you did some edits to fix problems before commenting here. I tagged you to give you an opportunity to fix the data and references you added before removal. See WP:BURDEN. -- Mikeblas (talk) 20:25, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I went to verify your complaint and found that the first district in the article was correct, then checked a few more and some were correct and some were not. I fixed the errors in the ones I was checking since I was already taking the time to verify them. It takes time to identify, check the updated source, and then update the article. I thought since you identified the issue, you'd be interested in helping with fixing it. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 22:18, 23 October 2022 (UTC)