Talk:April 2021 Bulgarian parliamentary election

Discussion
You made some minor mistakes when recalculating the latest results, I'm guessing because you didn't browse the text in the page and see that there was a reference to the exact percentages for people who said they wouldn't vote versus people who chose 'none'. Just in case, the formula I use to recalculate is the following: (A x B) divided by C. A = original percentage, B = 1% of pollees, C = 1% of pollees that chose a party and none/other. For the latest poll from Gallup, B is 8.07 and C is 5.7. This will not always equal a perfect 100% result and slight rounding is okay, within reason, but do it at the very end. Another thing you made a small error with is the proper colors. I've already assigned colors to each party, and those are used to calculate the proper colors if they're in the lead. Example: BSP's color is #D71921. Take that, input it into this color picker and use the 75% gradient for their party's % in a poll and the 60% gradient for their lead %. The last error you made is that data-sort-value should always point to the last fieldwork date, instead of the date the poll was released - you'd set it as the 17th of September, instead of the 11th of September. Thanks for the help :) --Yupyuphello (talk) 15:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, ! Thanks for this clarification, I'll make sure I adhere to it for the next available poll. Can you clarify how do you get the result for variable C? You state that this is 1% of the pollees that chose a party and none/other. According to the Gallup poll, there are 807 respondents, of which 63.8% indicating that they will vote for a party or none of the above. According to my calculations, C should be 5.14, not 5.7 as you indicated. --Becksperson (talk) 15:44, 17 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Hey, in this case Gallup provides info outside of the graphics, within the first few paragraphs - 6.8% of the pollees chose 'none', 29.4% chose 'I will not vote' and 9.3% chose 'Other'. In the graphics, 'none' and 'I will not vote' were shown as a unified data point, unlike previous graphics, but thankfully they added the information within the article itself. In this case, we just multiply 29.4 by 1% of the pollees (8.07) and that gives us 237.258 pollees that chose 'I will not vote', which we round down to 237. 807 minus 237 equals 570 pollees that chose something other than 'I will not vote' and one percent of that is 5.7. Theoretically you could use 5.69742 and round up at the end, I think either way would be acceptable as long as you're careful about not rounding up in a way that favors one party over another - it's better to have results that total to something less than 100, rather than aiming at always being closer to 100. --Yupyuphello (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey again, I saw that you've done some work on the German page, would you mind aligning its data with that of this page? Also, I noticed the last column only says 'Other' and doesn't include 'None' as in none of the above, which is a distinction that should be made. --Yupyuphello (talk) 12:09, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for undoing your changes, but they were arbitrary as far as usefulness and contained old information. I'm up for a different formatting for the article, by all means, but it should include information on the current distribution within parliament and expected political parties/alliances + their leaders. The German version of this article has a good option, under 'Parteien und Kandidaten', though we might have to wait until official confirmation by the Central Election Commission. Please whip up any suggestions you have on how you'd like to improve the article in your own sandbox and ping me here so we can discuss :) --Yupyuphello (talk) 09:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I was not ready yet when you reverted it. I will try to do it in a sandbox and I'm gonna post it again. I included all major candidates, as well as the seats they won last election (2017) and the seats they need to form a majority government.
 * Run it up in a sandbox and link it here with a ping once you're ready. We'd need photos for all of them and everything to look good on a typical 1920x1080 PC screen setup, don't mind mobile that much. Personally I'm not sure whether we should focus on seats that were won during the previous election or amount they held at the end, since both seem important in different ways. To be honest, there are result designs that allow to show stuff like that, so you might skip it altogether or focus on number of votes and % of vote they won at the last elections, with a breakdown of the individual alliance members' results? Also, remember to sign your posts, you do that by using two dashes and four tilde signs, unspaced from one another, but spaced away from the end of your last sentence. Also, start new paragraphs with a colon, increasing the numbers of colons based on the previous post's colons. I advise using source code editing to get a better view of that. --Yupyuphello (talk) 15:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Undoing your changes - you can clean out the parties not in parliament from the sidebar, but Attack doesn't currently have any people in parliament - what I mean by this is that unless you form a parliamentary group, even if said MPs are elected from your party, they are counted towards Independents. On that note - OP is dead, but their parliamentary group isn't, so until it does they're still OP within the current parliament. --Yupyuphello (talk) 12:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yet again, sorry for undoing, but you're continuing to fix some things but break others - BSP ran under the "BSP za Balgaria" coalition name, while ABV took their former "Koalitsiya za Balgaria" name (settled in court or by CIK, can't remember). Also, as I've said - the OP coalition has not disintegrated within the current parliament, which has yet to dissolve/end its term, so splitting up NFSB and VMRO is meaningless right now. Also, BSP's parliament group has 70 members right now - 10 of them left the parliament group and became independents, so amending that to the 80 they got doesn't make sense, especially since you haven't done the same for DPS, who lost 1 member in the same member (they had 26 originally). Please feel free to run up a sandbox and ping me to it, so we can do this together and/or in a constructive manner. --Yupyuphello (talk) 16:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Why is ITN written "ИТН" (the Bulgarian spelling) in the first chart?
BonsMans1 (talk) 14:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 'ИТН' does not appear anywhere on this article as far as I can see? Number   5  7  14:49, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It was fixed, maybe it was just me BonsMans1 (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Party information
If you're going to copy my work, at least copy it properly please :) The colors are utterly wrong and adding secondary colors is pointless - some of the support that's with a gray background was by NGOs - those don't have an official color by law. Also, ideology shouldn't include stuff like 'centre-right', nor should there be more than 1 item per party in it. I'll give you a few days to correct it, before doing so myself. --Yupyuphello (talk) 07:15, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The map of the seat allocation by constituencies
I found a small mistake on the map. DB should have 3 seats in the 25th constituency and BSP should have only 2 seats there. Can Emicho's Avenger (talk) correct this small mistake? Thank you in advance!
 * Read up top.

Mysteries of Hare-Niemeyer
Can someone explain how Maksim Genchev got elected for Kurdzhali with 1.1% of the vote and 0.07% of a quota? Constant Pedant (talk) 17:11, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you able to help with this query? Cheers, Number   5  7  20:10, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't see what the issue is - it doesn't matter what part of the local vote ISMV got in Kardzhali. Since every region has a different set of 'mandates' (a.k.a. spots for election to Parliament), sometimes you get the situation where you have to give one party a spot in a region where they performed horribly and you make it up to the party that should have gotten that spot by giving them one in another region. I haven't looked into the mechanics of the whole thing in years, but this is fairly normal and happens at every election. --Yupyuphello (talk) 07:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The issue is that in a system of proportional representation a candidate got elected who clearly didn't deserve to, because he polled 1.1% of the vote in a district where the quota for election was 16.7%. Where does Bulgarian electoral law say "you have to give one party a spot in a region where they performed horribly", and why? And it's not true that it "happens at every election." I've been through the 2017 results and nothing like this happened in any district. Can you point me to statistics that show exactly how Genchev got elected? Constant Pedant (talk) 16:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Ping me next time, watching a page doesn't always send me notifications for whatever reason. A quick search says that an example of the above issue is Andrei Slabakov's election to the European Parliament (VMRO getting 2 mandates instead of 1, slighting GERB), as well as similar issues at the 2014 elections for the Yambol, Gabrovo and Kyustendil regions. There was a suggestion from the Venice Commission back in 2014 to use the D'Hondt method, but that didn't go through I guess. If you're curious about what might be a future proposal if ITN manages to form a government, use DeepL or Google Translate to look at Iva Miteva's thesis on the subject. As far as I gathered from the news article - all of the parties' votes are divided by a quota, which equals the minimal number of votes needed for a mandate. Typically you get a demical fraction as a result, in the form of a number and a 'remnant' (pardon my lack of mathematical lingo). Each party gets preliminary mandates, which equal the first number of the demical fraction. If any mandates are up for grabs, the parties get them by way of the second number in that decimal fraction - they're ranked by highest value. So, let's say there were 3 mandates left open and the first 3 parties in that ranking were GERB, Democratic Bulgaria and ISMV. Those 3 parties each get a mandate, but whoever was after them wouldn't. --Yupyuphello (talk) 22:25, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I haven't seen Ping before. Anyway, thanks for that comment. I understand how proportional representation works: we use it in Australia for Senate elections and in some state elections. What I want to know is how it worked in this particular case. Kurdzhali elected five members, so the quota was one-sixth, or 16.67%. Expressed as quotas, the result was DPS 3.78, GERB 0.92, BSP 0.49, ITN 0.32, DB 0.13, ISMV 0.07, others 0.29. So DPS got three members elected on the first count. No-one else had a quota, so I assume DPS's 0.78 of a quota was then distributed to the other parties. My question is: by what method was it distributed? Did DPS decide where its surplus should go? Could DPS's voters indicate a second choice on their ballot paper? Or was the surplus automatically directed to the party nearest to a quota? It's easy to see that GERB would have got to a quota by any method. But how did ISMV get a quota? The last seat should have gone to DPS or BSP. Perhaps you can explain that. But what I really want is to see the actual statistical report on the counting of the vote in Kurdzhali. Can anyone direct me to that? Constant Pedant (talk) 02:19, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd written a ton of things, but I actually found what you're looking for. Look at this page with Google Translate or DeepL, it shows the 'iterations' and how things got moved around until the final mandates were decided. --Yupyuphello (talk) 07:16, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that reference, which explains what happened. The BSP did win the fourth mandate in Kardzhali, but it was later transferred to ISMV (along with a number of others) in order to achieve a nationally proportional result. The main loser at the national level was the BSP, which won 51 mandates but finished with 43. I have created a table to show how the process worked. Constant Pedant (talk) 02:23, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm happy I was able to help! When the next elections are over, feel free to ping me a week or two afterwards and I'll check if there's a file like this one again :) Should you feel like doing so, I'm sure the current article would benefit from an explanation of the process or some form of the table you created? --Yupyuphello (talk) 08:05, 11 June 2021 (UTC)