Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics

Election Infobox Color Bar

Hello everyone I would like to as if we the Wikipedia Politics community can remove Color Bar on the election infoboxes for all nonpartison Election races for the United States. Quick explanation on nonpartisan elections, nonpartisan elections where the candidates party affiliation is not listed on the ballot in the United States, The color bars (shown on the first infobox on the bottom of the candidates pictures) we added to not add political party on the election infobox but most editers will still put political parties or will remove the color bars as a good faith edit but some veteran editors will put the color bars back on the election infoboxes. To end the madness I would like to request the we remove the color boxes to end good faith edit and to make it visually easier for people who are color blind to see the election infoboxes (shown on second infobox) thank you.

(The candidates pictures are used as an example and are not actual election infoboxes)

First Infobox

June 7, 2022 (first round) November 8, 2022 (runoff)
Registered	2,120,515
Turnout	43.86%
Candidate Karen Bass Eric Garcetti First round 278,511 43.11% 121,930 32.27% Runoff 509,944 54.83% 222,300 54.23%   Candidate Antonio Villaraigosa James Hahn First round 136,242 33.10% 125,139 25.05% Runoff Eliminated Eliminated
Mayor before election Eric Garcetti Elected Mayor Karen Bass

Second Infobox

June 7, 2022 (first round) November 8, 2022 (runoff)
Registered	2,120,515
Turnout	43.86%
Candidate Karen Bass Eric Garcetti First round 278,511 43.11% 121,930 32.27% Runoff 509,944 54.83% 222,300 54.23%   Candidate Antonio Villaraigosa James Hahn First round 136,242 33.10% 125,139 25.05% Runoff Eliminated Eliminated
Mayor before election Eric Garcetti Elected Mayor Karen Bass

2603:8000:57F0:92E0:DD0D:B754:A364:DB4D (talk) 02:27, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

That can be useful when complementing a map underside. However, I have no issues if color bar is removed either. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 18:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello CX Zoom[he/him] I see your point on the map underside. The madness of editers put political parties or will remove the color bars as a good faith edit is overwhelming inconvenient. 2603:8000:57F0:92E0:DD0D:B754:A364:DB4D (talk) 02:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Why not use the campaign colour of the candidate? (signs, website, literature, etc). That's what we do in Canadian municipal elections, most of which are non partisan as well. -- Earl Andrew - talk 13:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Earl Andrew - talk using the campaign colour is what started the madness of editers put political parties as a good faith from me looking at the edit history. 2603:8000:57F0:92E0:DD0D:B754:A364:DB4D (talk) 02:02, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, we definitely shouldn't be using four non-partisan colour bars, because at that point it's not actually informing anything (that it's a non-partisan election can be mentioned in the body). But a better approach would be to identify each candidate with the colours they use in their campaign materials. Colour-coding can be quite handy, since most election pages have results maps or polling graphs — and identifying a candidate with a certain colour can a) serve as a legend before you get to those graphics and b) ensure that all those graphics are consistent with each other. As for how to determine those colours, like Earl Andrew said, we can use their campaign materials for guidance. This is essentially what we already do for internal party contests: 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries gives each candidate their own colour instead of everyone having Democratic blue. — Kawnhr (talk) 18:34, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree with this. Use colours if they have them, but if not, don't use them at all. Colour bars aren't used on (e.g.) 2024 Icelandic presidential election because it's a nonpartisan election. Number 57 21:12, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Hello Number 57 I believe that we should use the 2024 Icelandic presidential election infobox for nonpartison election races for the United States to end the good fath edit madness. 2603:8000:57F0:92E0:DD0D:B754:A364:DB4D (talk) 02:09, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Kawnhr (talk) I mention this to Earl Andrew - talk by using the campaign colour is what started the madness of editers put political parties as a good faith from me looking at the edit history. 2603:8000:57F0:92E0:DD0D:B754:A364:DB4D (talk) 02:06, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I think the slow-rolling edit war can be mostly attributed to there not being a clearly-established consensus for how to handle non-partisan elections — so editors jump in assuming they're fixing something. If we have project agreement one way or the other, I think that will settle a lot of the disputes. — Kawnhr (talk) 20:11, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Kawnhr (talk) Agree 100% thats the goal. 2603:8000:57F0:92E0:DD0D:B754:A364:DB4D (talk) 21:01, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I'll just let people know that this is most likely a sockpuppet of FYE31, who has frequently campaigned against grey coloring in nonpartisan elections in the past under different accounts. Personally, I've been against removing colors, I think it just looks bad without anything, but I can endorse the idea that Kawnhr said where it's using campaign colors/color-coding to identify them. I like that idea way more than just removing them altogether. reppop^talk 05:45, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello reppop^talk thank you for you comment. I do have a question is there a way to put Party Affiliate on the infobox where the Political Party would be placed as a solution for all nonpartisan election infoboxes? 2603:8000:57F0:92E0:DD0D:B754:A364:DB4D (talk) 21:08, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

We should absolutely be using colored bars in the infoboxes no matter what. Without the colored bars, any infobox with more than 3 candidates has bad formatting because the line separating the rows doesn't show up. I don't see the issue with having gray colored bars. This has been the standard on US nonpartisan election pages for years. Having a colored bar helps separate the image from the candidate's name and just generally improves the formatting. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 14:25, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

We could also change the code to include the separator line even when there is no color bar. Technology is not the restriction here. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 17:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

I agree with —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} Technology is not the restriction at all. let's remove the color bars to end the good faith edits and change the code to include the separator line. I would like to call for a vote to one remove the color bars to end the good faith edits and two to change the code to include the separator line without the color bars. 66.74.82.136 (talk) 23:03, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Would also like to point out it's possible to brute force the separator in even without colours, as demonstrated on pages like 2005 Conservative Party leadership election (the trick: have a color= field but dummy out the code. the colour bar doesn't appear, but the separator still does.) Obviously, it would be ideal to fix this on a template level… but this is one more reason that technical issues shouldn't be a consideration. — Kawnhr (talk) 18:28, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Feminist economics

Feminist economics has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Legal history of cannabis in the United States

Legal history of cannabis in the United States has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 18:42, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Presidency of Ulysses S. Grant

Presidency of Ulysses S. Grant has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:01, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

More eyes on Homeland Party (United Kingdom) please

Over the past few months there have been a lot of new accounts who have very few edits (and in many cases zero edits outside of this article) trying to water down or remove the far-right and fascist labelling of this party. Given that this group is known to be quite coordinated I assume these are members of the party itself. They're not quite giving up, so I'd request some of you add this to your watchlist and keep an eye on the talk page discussions. Thanks. — Czello ^(music) 16:18, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Max Boot

Max Boot has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Richard Butler (white supremacist)#Requested move 18 June 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Richard Butler (white supremacist)#Requested move 18 June 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 08:55, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Shanghai

Shanghai has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 18:36, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Suharto

Suharto has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 18:45, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

Notice of last opportunity to weigh-in on discussion about Trump infobox photo for 2024 election article

At Talk:2024 United States presidential election, there is a discussion that was started in early June on the question of whether to use a January portrait of Trump in the infobox, or switch to a newer portrait from June. There was division between editors as to what photo should be used, and the what would be an appropriate rationale to justify either a change or retention of the status quo. However, this discussion seems to have died down.

I am posting notice here and other task forces and projects related to that article so editors un-familiar that it was taking place but interested in weighing-in can comment. After opportunity for any additional editors to comment has been given, I will go to the SecretName101 (talk) 00:42, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Gavin Newsom on Rockstar Energy

Hi Editors!

We're having a conversation over on the Rockstar Energy Talk page. Another editor suggested we get some outside input, so I wanted to extend an invite to editors here who might find it interesting.

The topic is currently regarding Gavin Newsom and Russell Weiner and a returned donation. Stop by and give your thoughts!

Disclaimer: I am a representative for Rockstar Energy and maintain a commitment to the COI editing rules.

Ping me over there if you have any thoughts or questions! EC for Golin (talk) 13:39, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Gavin Newsom on Rockstar Energy

Hi Editors!

We're having a conversation over on the Rockstar Energy Talk page. Another editor suggested we get some outside input, so I wanted to extend an invite to editors here who might find it interesting.

The topic is currently regarding Gavin Newsom and Russell Weiner and a returned donation. Stop by and give your thoughts!

Disclaimer: I am a representative for Rockstar Energy and maintain a commitment to the COI editing rules.

Ping me over there if you have any thoughts or questions! EC for Golin (talk) 13:39, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Statesman/stateswoman

Hi, discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#Statesman/stateswoman about whether statesman/stateswoman should be used in WP:WIKIVOICE in biographies Kowal2701 (talk) 21:19, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

South Korean martial law crisis split

Consensus was established that 2024 South Korean martial law crisis should be split into multiple articles, but this has yet to be executed. Is anyone willing to do this? Would be a big help; political fallout is still ongoing and endlessly big. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 02:14, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Axis of Upheaval#Requested move 24 July 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Axis of Upheaval#Requested move 24 July 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Векочел (talk) 12:00, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Your Party (disambiguation)#Requested move 28 July 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Your Party (disambiguation)#Requested move 28 July 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.

-- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 20:01, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation) § RfC: Titles for subarticles of presidencies

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation) § RfC: Titles for subarticles of presidencies, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Ham II (talk) 05:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

2025 New York City Democratic mayoral primary has an RfC

2025 New York City Democratic mayoral primary has an RfC for determining the colors used for electoral result maps. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Einsof (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2025 (UTC)