Talk:2024 South Carolina Democratic presidential primary/Archive 1

Created page
I am creating pages for the 2024 Democratic Party Primaries, and this is one of them. It's still a WIP, so feel free to add to it. We could use a "background" section explaining the new primary calendar and stuff. WorldMappings (talk) 19:47, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Results template
Results template has been created at Template:2024SCDem. To edit the votes under results you have to edit that template. Esolo5002 (talk) 00:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Consensus that second-place candidate should be included in infobox
Per this consensus reached in 2017, we list at least two candidates in election infoboxes if there were more than two running. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elections_and_Referendums/Archive_16#RfC_on_Infoboxes:_Should_there_always_be_two_candidates? A 2020 consensus seemed to affirm that as being the standard treatment, with the allowance for exception if reached by consensus in individual articles' talk pages].

Unless these consensuses have been superseded, I edit accordingly.

Under the consensus, it would take either consensus for an exception (preferably reached on the talk pages of either 2024 Democratic Party presidential primaries or 2024 United States presidential election, as this will surely come up again in other primaries) OR a complete project-wide overturning of that consensus for us to remove Williamson from the infobox and still be in accordance with consensus.

As you can read on that second RFC, I was STRONGLY opposed to including low-placing second-place candidates in infoboxes (and still would stand against it if it were re-discussed). However, it IS the most recent consensus on this question that I am aware of, and I'll edit accordingly. SecretName101 (talk) 05:32, 4 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @Expoe34 also pinging you to let you know SecretName101 (talk) 05:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The 2017 consensus looks like it was about the general elections, rather than the primary elections. It especially concerns the case where Donald Trump, who won the overall election, polled less than the 5% threshold in District of Columbia. This is very different to Marianne Williamson, who is not winning the overall election. The 2020 consensus allows for cases such as this, where we can make a judgement as to whether Williamson should be included in the infobox. There is very far from any project-wide consensus enforcing us to have Williamson in the infobox. In other words, a consensus on this article should suffice in deriving which way to go for this particular case. Onetwothreeip (talk) 10:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * No, it was about top-of-article infoboxes for US elections in general. DC was one example given.
 * also, General elections are the only elections for most races that have article infoboxes. It was clearly at its core about top-of-article infoboxes for elections.
 * The consensus is applicable to this. SecretName101 (talk) 12:31, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The 2017 RFC asked, “ What should be the standard for inclusion in the infobox of U.S. election articles?“ and “If only one candidate meets the yet-to-be-defined-threshold, should the second-place contender be included?”.
 * I so not EVEN REMOTELY see any stipulation about it applying only to infoboxes for articles about general elections, let one such to the exclusion of application to standalone articles on primaries SecretName101 (talk) 12:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * There is only Williamson and Philips’s performance minimal differentiation in this primary race: 487 votes out of over 131K, a 0.4% margin, with neither securing any delegates. An info box gives an at-glance overview of the election. I believe adding the 2nd place alongside Biden in the info box could potentially exaggerate Williamson’s performance arbitrarily. 沁水湾 (talk) 15:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Again, see consensus. And this page is not the best place to overturn it. Go to the conversation at Talk:2024 United States presidential election to even begin discussing it. Or start a well-written project-wide RFC at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums. But not here, we should not do it piecemeal primary-by-primary. SecretName101 (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The consensus you linked specifically notes that the matter may best be settled in a discussion on the talk page, and WP:NOTBURO tells us to "not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policies without considering their principles." The circumstances of each election may change the best practice for that page. Read the consensus, consider the circumstances of THIS PAGE, and apply the RfC as a guide, not law. In this case, listing Williamson and not Phillips is contrary to common sense. We should list both or neither.  GreatCaesarsGhost   19:39, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @GreatCaesarsGhost Again, at the VERY LEAST please take it to the MAIN talk page for the 2024 election. With more than 109 state caucuses and primaries set to occur (counting both major parties), it would be exhausting to do this piecemeal for each of those contests. SecretName101 (talk) 04:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah it's important to note that the relevant project consensus gives a wide allowance for exceptions to be determined by local consensus. We should keep the threshold at 5%, with an exception for candidates who win the entire primary election or win delegates, but not for being the second-place candidate. Onetwothreeip (talk) 21:39, 4 February 2024 (UTC)