Jump to content

Talk:Banzhaf power index

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Untitled]

[edit]

I'm not quite sure how to write the math part. Someone with a little bit more math writing skills want to take a shot at it? --Zoop 16:55, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

History

[edit]

The calculation is wrong. BC is not a majority coalition. I am removing this section, rather then redo it. No Info is better then wrong info! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.246.2.25 (talk) 16:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Bad. Added it back in Calc was correct after all!

References

[edit]

Need the complete reference for Straffin Koczy 16:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Indirect voting systems

[edit]

I think we need another section to explain the voting powers of citizens that elect delegates who then have to vote en bloc, as for example in the Electoral College (United States). I think, this is an important application as it also explains the fairness of the Penrose method for such systems. There, the voting powers (i.e, the Banzhaf power index) of people from polities of different sizes are equal if the delegations of each polity receive their voting weight according to the square root of the population they represent and if the vote en bloc. Obviously, the voting powers of the delegations are not equal then but reciprocal to the voting power of the people in their respective elections for the delegations.

In contrast to this 2-stage application, the article currently deals with 1-stage systems only, as applies to the Banzhaf indexes of people in referendums or the Banzhaf indexes of delegations in parliaments. It would be interesting to show how these indexes translate to the indexes of the people electing the delegations.

Please comment on this endeavor before I start introducing the new section proposed here. Tomeasy T C 23:24, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to see this added! Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 00:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Banzhaf power index. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:41, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Banzhaf power index. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:12, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
Further information: Wikipedia: External links
Some things just grow during incremental edits and sometimes get out of hand. The "External links" section, one of the optional appendices, was expanded to 12 entries, organized into three subsections. Three seems to be an acceptable number, and of course, everyone has their favorite to try to add for a fourth. Consensus needs to determine this. A tag indicates concerns.
However, none is needed for article promotion.
Some links may be included in WP:ELNO, or What Wikipedia is not (policy) such as WP:NOTREPOSITORY or WP:NOTGUIDE.
  • WP:ELDEAD may apply.
  • In some cases ELCITE applies: Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section. Others, listed below:
  • ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
  • LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
  • ELMIN: Minimize the number of links.
The External links guideline This page in a nutshell: External links in an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article. With rare exceptions, external links should not be used in the body of an article.
Second paragraph, acceptable external links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy.
    • Please also note:
  • WP:ELBURDEN: Disputed links should be excluded by default unless and until there is a consensus to include them. Please do not add back more links without consensus. Simple solution to facilitate career maintenance tag. Move links here for discussion.
Moved links:
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Banzhaf_power_index&oldid=1295856880"