User talk:Not Another NPC

Welcome!
Hello, Not Another NPC, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

TPP/TCP Graphs for Electorates
Hi there,

Thanks for reaching out about the graph project you've been doing in regards to a few federal electorates. I actually took upon your ideas from a few pages and made it a "one graph" kind of visual but then I realised that many electorates have been redistributed, abolished and re-instated. What were your thoughts on approaching that so we have a sense of consistency?

--APNOneTwo (talk) 12:41, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem, I'm glad to not be doing this just by myself.
 * By "One graph" do you meaning doing the 2CP and primary votes in one graph? I've haven't seen that, the only graph of your's I've seen is Griffith, but that is an idea I'm more than open to. I do worry slightly that it might be visually confusing, and we would need to figure out how to colour the 2CP lines.
 * In regards to redistributions, it's possible to figure out the redistributed state of an electorate by taking the swings from the first election after the redistribution. For example, I know that the 2016 redistributed ALP 2PP result for Makin is 60.79% as compared to 59.65% prior to the redistribution. It is possible to use the same x value in a graph, so what I've done is include both the pre- and post-redistributed results in the graphs. Generally this is fine, however, in cases of more significant redistributions this results in the dots rather far apart, resulting in a vertical line. Rather than have this, when this has occured I have broken the data into multiple series with the same colours. This does require an external legend, however, as it is (as far as I'm aware) impossible to have an internal legend that doesn't have as many entries as data series, which, in this case, is undesirable as multiple data series are used for the same party.
 * The same must also be done in cases when a party runs with at least one break between runs but also at least one case where they ran at subsequent elections (sorry if that doesn't make sense, its difficult to articulate), as it will draw a line across elections where it did not run. If, for example, One Nation ran in an electorate in 1998 and 2001 and then in 2016 and 2019 then a line would be drawn between, creating visual clutter and possibly implying they ran when they didn't.
 * I haven't touched abolished electorates, but I've done the couple that were reconstituted, but only in their second incarnations.
 * In regards to colour I've just been using the Wikipedia party template colours


 * --Not Another NPC 21:33, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Have you also added yourself to WikiProjects Australia? Always to have another member on the team.

In terms of "one graph" I made the relevant axes joined together out of aesthetic reasons. I like your idea regarding when there has been significant redistribution or multiple parties that have run as seen with ONP in 1998, 2001, 2016-2019 and so on. I think I might take a look at creating multiple series in some electorates soon. Let me know your thoughts.

Update: I have found a way to indicate when there has been a redistribution in an electorate. I was going through the parameters of how to create charts in Wikipedia and found the "annotation" set. For example, if you look at the graph I made for Division of Makin, you can see it. The code itself was:

|vAnnotatonsLine=2018 |vAnnotatonsLabel=Redistributed

Let me know your thoughts on this. --APNOneTwo (talk) 10:06, 16 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reminding me of Wikiprojects Aus. I've been meaning to join up.


 * I like the idea of the annotation, however I feel like just using it causes a significant amount of info to be lost re swing. Take Makin; without showing the post redistribution 2016 I have no idea about the swing that occured. From the graph I don't know whether the redistribution significantly increased the ALP margin but there was a equally significant swing to the Libs, or vice versa, or even if it was a minor redistribution with a status quo result. And even if it is only used for cases of minor redistributions, that that is the case will not be apparent to regular users.
 * That said, I do think it would be useful to place it for all redistributions, so to make clear that that has occured, and explain vertical breaks to users in cases of significant redistributions


 * Also, how are you deciding of what colour to use? The ALP has template colours, but nothing else does.


 * --Not Another NPC 11:13, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Tips for creating Australian Electorate Voting Graphs (e.g. 2PP Graphs)
Hi there,

Noticed you have been constructing electorate graphs displaying primary vote and two-party vote over time in some Australian electorates and have been finding these very informative.

I was just wondering if you had any tips as to how to construct these graphs? Is there any software or template you use? I am relatively inexperienced as an editor on Wikipedia so would be appreciative of any tips you might have if you happen to see this message.

Best regards and thanks a lot. E-Class Tram (talk) 12:18, 16 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for reaching out, I'm glad that someone is finding them helpful!
 * First, I'm not that experienced myself, so everything I know I taught myself and thus, I probably have taught myself sub-optimally.
 * Anyhow, I believe I got the format from a British constituency page, as that is where I discovered the concept. You can just copy the format from any electoral page with one of my graphs, and just replace the data with that of the electorate you want to apply it to. I recommend Hasluck as a good example to copy from. I think what each component of the format does is reasonably apparent, and feel free to mess around with a page to get your grips on it, so long as you don't publish.
 * A couple of tips:
 * I get the hex colours I use (and the graph requires hex colours) from here. I believe similar exists for other jurisdictions. However, that does not actually provide hex colours. So, I use snipping tool to grab the example of the colour and then paste the image into a colour picker to get the hex colour, which I then use. You can also just copy the colours from any external legend (as it lists the colour next to the party). I recommend Groom due to the shear number of parties that have gotten over 5% of the vote at one point or another in that electorate.
 * When using multiple y(n)s for a single party, use them sequentially (i.e. y1 & y2 are for Labor, not y1 and y7). This will make your life a lot easier, especially if you want to add results later.
 * You can get the results of the previous election post a redistribution by taking the swing figure provided in the info box and applying the opposite to the result. For example if a Liberal got 45% and received a +5% swing, then the previous election result, redistribution adjusted, would have been 40% (45%-5%)
 * And now, some philosophical aspects of my graphs, in comparison to my contemporaries and just in general:
 * Personally, I dislike having the initial dot be on the y-axis so I set the min as a year before the year of the first graphed election.
 * The vote share range. For primary votes I set the min at 0 and the max as the highest result rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5 (e.g. if the highest result is 61 than I'll set the max at 65). For the 2CP I round both the max and the min in the same way (but down for the min), as to create a more obvious line of symmetry, but it would be perfectly acceptable to set the min as 0.
 * Re: how to deal with redistributions. You have two options:
 * 1) Ignore them
 * 2) Show them
 * Option 1 has the problem of hiding information: an electorate might have had a significant redistribution and an equally significant swing back to the disadvantaged party. If you don't show this you give the viewer the impression that there was no swing, when the opposite was the case. Similarly, a significant redistribution followed by no swing looks like a large swing. This is why I can't in good conscious use option 1
 * However, using option 2 requires some formatting sacrifices: first, when there is a significant redistribution it creates a vertical line, which creates significant visual clutter and just looks bad. Thus, it is necessary to separate a party's results over multiple y(n)s. This means that you can't use the internal legend available within the format of the graph and instead have to use a external legend.
 * Related, when dealing with parties that haven't ran consistently if you place all of their results within a single y(n) then it'll create a line over the period of time when they did not run. This a) creates visual clutter, b) implies at a glance that the party did run at that election and received a specific result and c) can obscure other information. Using multiple y(n)s, however also prevents the use of the internal legend.
 * I really hope this helps, and feel free to contact me whenever; I'll always be happy to help. Not Another NPC (talk) 13:05, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @Not Another NPC
 * Thanks very much for your detailed tips and much appreciate your assistance in distilling the graph construction process. I am looking forward to trying out constructing some graphs when I have a chance. Thanks so much for taking the time to explain all of this!
 * Cheers. E-Class Tram (talk) 10:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Post-election pendulum for the 2022 Victorian state election moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Post-election pendulum for the 2022 Victorian state election, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:47, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Post-election pendulum for the 2022 Victorian state election has been accepted
 Post-election pendulum for the 2022 Victorian state election, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Post-election_pendulum_for_the_2022_Victorian_state_election help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! UtherSRG (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Not Another NPC. Thank you for your work on List of New South Wales Legislative Councillors. User:MPGuy2824, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, I had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Pages consisting of nothing but tables of vote counts
Hello! I see that you've been creating a lot of articles pertaining to Australian government. I believe there may be a problem with some of the articles which consist only of tables of vote counts which were sourced from https://www.elections.act.gov.au; that site has a copyright which doesn't appear to be compatible with Wikipedia. Also, I don't believe that pages consisting of nothing but tabular data are suitable for Wikipedia's purpose. Instead of copying that data to Wikipedia, might it make sense to link to the source pages instead? - Brian Kendig (talk) 02:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Also, the results can just be posted to the parent articles which aren't long enough to warrant a split. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That is the convention in the UK and Canada. Not sure why it isn't here. But if you want to change it (which I am neutral on btw) this is not the place for that discussion. Not Another NPC (talk) 06:32, 15 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi. I started creating these pages for the Tasmanian Legislative Council, Tasmanian House of Assembly and ACT Legislative Assembly because these are the only types of (currently existing) Australian electorates that don't have pages of such nature (see: Federal, Queensland, NSW, Victoria, South Australia, the Northern Territory and Western Australia). All I am doing is creating a long established page format and applying it to pages of a similar nature. As to the ACT data, these pages are excerpts and thus whatever issues you have with that are with the original pages (such as Results of the 2020 Australian Capital Territory general election) - Not Another NPC 03:00 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Referendum and Plebiscite results
Please have a look at my recent changes to your additions of "Referendum and Plebiscite results" – examples: Sentence case, per MOS:HEADCAPS, simpler and/or more informative headings – and follow that in future additions.

"Sentence case" is explicitly covered by MOS:HEADCAPS, so unless there's some compelling reason not to, you should use sentence case in any future additions.

"Simpler and/or more informative headings" is of course my opinion, but it if you disagree, please let's discuss the matter rather than you putting the same thing in multiple times, and me changing it multiple times. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Only saw it this afternoon, after I had done some more edits. I'm sorry I didn't notice it earlier. Thanks for making it cleaner, and I'll definitely carry it going forward. Not Another NPC (talk) 09:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * And sentence case please, per MOS:HEADCAPS. Mitch Ames (talk) 00:05, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Got it. I'm just an idiot who forgets that plebiscite isn't a proper noun sometimes. Sorry Not Another NPC (talk) 00:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

New message from GMH Melbourne
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board § Suggestion RE: recent edits to electoral division articles.. ––– GMH MELBOURNE   TALK  01:03, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2023 (UTC)