This template is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
So with regards to the delegates columns, could someone PLEASE label what P | U | T stand for? Of course I can inference, but I can't find any useful leads on any of the other pages or polluted Google search results. I'm less frustrated that I don't know what it means, I'm more frustrated that I'm sure there's hundreds of other citizens, just like me, who will leave this page confused or with wrong/incomplete data. AUTHOR: I am calling on you to PLEASE put (pun unintended) a lot more thought into this and add some useful context. Thanks, sorry for being upset. -Nuvigil (talk) 02:30, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-10T02:30:00.000Z","author":"Nuvigil","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Nuvigil-2016-03-10T02:30:00.000Z-Untitled","replies":["c-Guy1890-2016-03-11T05:47:00.000Z-Nuvigil-2016-03-10T02:30:00.000Z","c-Nuvigil-2016-03-25T10:29:00.000Z-Nuvigil-2016-03-10T02:30:00.000Z"]}}-->
If you mouse-over the P, U, T in the table, it tells you what they mean...Pledged delegates, Unpledged delegates & Total delegates. Guy1890 (talk) 05:47, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-11T05:47:00.000Z","author":"Guy1890","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Guy1890-2016-03-11T05:47:00.000Z-Nuvigil-2016-03-10T02:30:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Thanks. This is kind of embarrassing, but in my defense the computer/browser I was on at the time did not function that way. Thanks. "That was an overreaction" - Andy from The Office. Nuvigil (talk) 10:29, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-25T10:29:00.000Z","author":"Nuvigil","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Nuvigil-2016-03-25T10:29:00.000Z-Nuvigil-2016-03-10T02:30:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
A request: Could someone please edit the chart to include a running total of the "Popular vote or equivalent"? I'm curious how actual votes compare to delegates and who leads in them. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:445:8101:2AF6:C4E4:76D1:E35F:BC76 (talk) 00:11, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-12T00:11:00.000Z","author":"2601:445:8101:2AF6:C4E4:76D1:E35F:BC76","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-2601:445:8101:2AF6:C4E4:76D1:E35F:BC76-2016-04-12T00:11:00.000Z-Untitled","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-12T18:33:00.000Z-2601:445:8101:2AF6:C4E4:76D1:E35F:BC76-2016-04-12T00:11:00.000Z"]}}-->
There is a thread in the other template's talk about this issue. There are problems because the contests have very different rules, we should decide what to do with Caucuses that don't release vote numbers but equivalent numbers, or if we can correctly count together closed primaries votes and open primaries ones because they have substantially different weight. There is a very interesting debate, I suggest you to join it!--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 18:33, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-12T18:33:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-12T18:33:00.000Z-2601:445:8101:2AF6:C4E4:76D1:E35F:BC76-2016-04-12T00:11:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
AP has different popular vote numbers for a few states (AR, CO, MI that I've noticed so far), and those are the numbers being used everywhere else I've looked. Is The Green Papers being considered definitive for some reason? -24.46.199.98 (talk) 23:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-15T23:17:00.000Z","author":"24.46.199.98","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-24.46.199.98-2016-03-15T23:17:00.000Z-Source","replies":[]}}-->
Not sure why the Clinton & unpledged/uncommitted delegate totals were recently changed in this template here from these numbers, which are still cited in the template as a source. Guy1890 (talk) 07:38, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-18T07:38:00.000Z","author":"Guy1890","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Guy1890-2016-03-18T07:38:00.000Z-Michigan_totals_changed?","replies":["c-Burotar-2016-03-19T14:44:00.000Z-Guy1890-2016-03-18T07:38:00.000Z"]}}-->
The Green Papers uses Politico as source which in turn uses AP as source. However, TGP doesn't even have the same delegate count as Politico so I have no idea where they are getting those number for delegates. Furthermore, Politico's delegates numbers haven't been updated to the latest AP report, so again I don't know where they are getting those numbers. I think both Politico and The Green Papers are trying to get ahead of their source just to say they have the most updated numbers which they way well be ending as the final result, but as of the moment of the update it is not the most accurate result. Burotar (talk) 14:44, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-19T14:44:00.000Z","author":"Burotar","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Burotar-2016-03-19T14:44:00.000Z-Guy1890-2016-03-18T07:38:00.000Z","replies":["c-Morphinapg-2016-03-24T17:26:00.000Z-Burotar-2016-03-19T14:44:00.000Z"]}}-->
If 100% of precincts are reported, then why should there still be any leftover delegates? The delegates are assigned proportionally, are they not? Doesn't that mean the calculations can be done purely mathematically, and be entirely accurate? I would assume this is what The Green Papers is doing. Morphinapg (talk) 17:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-24T17:26:00.000Z","author":"Morphinapg","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Morphinapg-2016-03-24T17:26:00.000Z-Burotar-2016-03-19T14:44:00.000Z","replies":["c-Alain_David-2016-03-29T21:33:00.000Z-Morphinapg-2016-03-24T17:26:00.000Z"]}}-->
All aforementioned sources are not primary sources. Can I assume Michigan Department of State http://miboecfr.nictusa.com/election/results/2016PPR_CENR.html as the primary source? Doing the math on these figures according to proportional primary rules would give 67 - 63 advantage Sanders. Districts 13 and 14 are still provisional but very unlikely to swing a delegate.Alain David (talk) 21:33, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-29T21:33:00.000Z","author":"Alain David","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-Alain_David-2016-03-29T21:33:00.000Z-Morphinapg-2016-03-24T17:26:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
District level delegates Total 140 Clinton 93 Sanders 47
PLEO delegates Total 28 Clinton 18 Sanders 10
At Large delegates Total 46 Clinton 30 Sanders 16
Total Pledged delegates 214 Clinton 141 Sanders 73
Those available 3 go to Sanders, I think. Alain David (talk) 01:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-30T01:29:00.000Z","author":"Alain David","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alain_David-2016-03-30T01:29:00.000Z-Michigan_totals_changed?","replies":[]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-AbeFM-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Suggestion:_Cumulative_Popular_vote_or_equivalent_in_Schedule_and_results_of_pri-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z","replies":["c-AbeFM-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z-Suggestion:_Cumulative_Popular_vote_or_equivalent_in_Schedule_and_results_of_pri"],"text":"Suggestion: Cumulative Popular vote or equivalent in Schedule and results of primaries and caucuses chart","linkableTitle":"Suggestion: Cumulative Popular vote or equivalent in Schedule and results of primaries and caucuses chart"}-->
Suggestion: Cumulative Popular vote or equivalent in Schedule and results of primaries and caucuses chart
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-AbeFM-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Suggestion:_Cumulative_Popular_vote_or_equivalent_in_Schedule_and_results_of_pri-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z","replies":["c-AbeFM-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z-Suggestion:_Cumulative_Popular_vote_or_equivalent_in_Schedule_and_results_of_pri"],"text":"Suggestion: Cumulative Popular vote or equivalent in Schedule and results of primaries and caucuses chart","linkableTitle":"Suggestion: Cumulative Popular vote or equivalent in Schedule and results of primaries and caucuses chart"}-->
It would be awesome to add, at the bottom of the "Schedule and results of primaries and caucuses" graph, a running total of the average/cumulative "Popular vote or equivalent". Just add up the votes for each candidate and divide by the total.
It'd be nice to see even if it's not electorally relevant. Thanks! -AbeFM (talk) 05:20, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Abe (is that a good signature?)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z","author":"AbeFM","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-AbeFM-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z-Suggestion:_Cumulative_Popular_vote_or_equivalent_in_Schedule_and_results_of_pri","replies":["c-Abjiklam-2016-03-20T10:13:00.000Z-AbeFM-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z"]}}-->
It would be nice to have such a graph but we can't really add popular vote with county delegates or others. A good alternative is to have a cumulative pledged delegate count. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 10:13, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-20T10:13:00.000Z","author":"Abjiklam","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Abjiklam-2016-03-20T10:13:00.000Z-AbeFM-2016-03-20T05:20:00.000Z","replies":[],"displayName":"Abjikl\u0250m"}}-->
Total shown is 1,889, when I add up the individual rows I get 1,760. Am I missing something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDCram (talk • contribs) 16:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-27T16:47:00.000Z","author":"TDCram","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-TDCram-2016-03-27T16:47:00.000Z-Available_pledged_delegates_total","replies":["c-Abjiklam-2016-03-28T16:06:00.000Z-TDCram-2016-03-27T16:47:00.000Z"]}}-->
The numbers change all the time and not everyone is careful enough to correct the total every time. Feel free to make the corrections you see fit. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 16:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-28T16:06:00.000Z","author":"Abjiklam","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Abjiklam-2016-03-28T16:06:00.000Z-TDCram-2016-03-27T16:47:00.000Z","replies":[],"displayName":"Abjikl\u0250m"}}-->
I noticed that many of the states that have already had their primary/caucus are listed as having 0 available pledged delegates even though the totals from Clinton and Sanders are less then the total amount of pledged delegates. I fixed the discrepancy and updated the totals. The source for the data has been uniformed to just the New York Times, and they do not list the total number of pledged delegates or the number of available pledged delegates on their site.
People should be aware when updating totals to not just zero out the available pledged delegates. You need to subtract the number of pledged delegates that have been allocated to both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders from the total number of pledged delegates to obtain the number of available pledged delegates. -98.127.63.109 (talk) 16:17, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-29T16:17:00.000Z","author":"98.127.63.109","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-98.127.63.109-2016-03-29T16:17:00.000Z-Available_Pledged_Delegates","replies":["c-JFG-2016-03-29T22:57:00.000Z-98.127.63.109-2016-03-29T16:17:00.000Z"]}}-->
There was a long debate about acceptable sources on Talk:Democratic Party presidential primaries, 2016; a consensus solution is emerging: keeping New York Times / Associated Press as source for settled states, switching back to The Green Papers for states where some delegates are not allocated by NYT / AP, with a note that TGP numbers are unofficial projections. Would you agree to this approach? — JFGtalk22:57, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-29T22:57:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-JFG-2016-03-29T22:57:00.000Z-98.127.63.109-2016-03-29T16:17:00.000Z","replies":["c-JFG-2016-03-30T06:54:00.000Z-JFG-2016-03-29T22:57:00.000Z"]}}-->
I can't agree to this approach because it's unorganized. Let's remember that AP numbers are also unofficial projections, and we agreed on using AP/NYT as the source, so why should we use TGP numbers for projections but not AP projections? It makes no sense. Every major news source uses AP as a source, I don't know anyone that uses TGP.
I have now adjusted the states with missing delegates and the totals. Sources and explanation note included. — JFGtalk06:54, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-03-30T06:54:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-JFG-2016-03-30T06:54:00.000Z-JFG-2016-03-29T22:57:00.000Z","replies":["c-98.127.63.109-2016-04-02T22:53:00.000Z-JFG-2016-03-30T06:54:00.000Z"]}}-->
As long as the totals are consistent with the sources there is not a problem in my book. When I had made the original comment everything was sourced to the NYT and nothing to AP or The Green Papers and there was about 200 pledged delegates completely missing not being listed as being for Clinton, Sanders, or Unpledged. 98.127.63.109 (talk) 22:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-02T22:53:00.000Z","author":"98.127.63.109","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-98.127.63.109-2016-04-02T22:53:00.000Z-JFG-2016-03-30T06:54:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-No_sources_for_unpledged_delegates-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z","replies":["c-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z-No_sources_for_unpledged_delegates"],"text":"No sources for unpledged delegates","linkableTitle":"No sources for unpledged delegates"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-No_sources_for_unpledged_delegates-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z","replies":["c-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z-No_sources_for_unpledged_delegates"],"text":"No sources for unpledged delegates","linkableTitle":"No sources for unpledged delegates"}-->
With the switch from Green Papers to New York Times, we've lost our sources for the unpledged delegate count. I don't know what to suggest as an alternative to TGP, but I welcome any suggestions. What is certain is that we cannot keep the superdelegate count without a source. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 09:47, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z","author":"Abjiklam","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z-No_sources_for_unpledged_delegates","replies":["c-Alain_David-2016-04-03T12:14:00.000Z-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z"],"displayName":"Abjikl\u0250m"}}-->
I think List_of_Democratic_Party_superdelegates,_2016 is enough explanation. Alain David (talk) 12:14, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-03T12:14:00.000Z","author":"Alain David","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Alain_David-2016-04-03T12:14:00.000Z-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T09:47:00.000Z","replies":["c-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T15:50:00.000Z-Alain_David-2016-04-03T12:14:00.000Z"]}}-->
I'm not sure about that, not according to WP:WPNOTRS. Abjiklɐm (tɐlk) 15:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-03T15:50:00.000Z","author":"Abjiklam","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Abjiklam-2016-04-03T15:50:00.000Z-Alain_David-2016-04-03T12:14:00.000Z","replies":[],"displayName":"Abjikl\u0250m"}}-->
http://www.ksdp.org/2016/03/kansas-democratic-caucus-results/
Isn't This a better source for the results? Dajasj (talk) 08:22, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T08:22:00.000Z","author":"Dajasj","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Dajasj-2016-04-04T08:22:00.000Z-Kansas_Reults","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-05T08:53:00.000Z-Dajasj-2016-04-04T08:22:00.000Z"]}}-->
We put this source in the footnote.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 08:53, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-05T08:53:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-05T08:53:00.000Z-Dajasj-2016-04-04T08:22:00.000Z","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-08T16:38:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-05T08:53:00.000Z"]}}-->
The New York Times and The Green Papers updated Kansas results. Obviously Kansas Democratic Caucus was right. I updated and removed the footnote.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 16:38, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-08T16:38:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-08T16:38:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-05T08:53:00.000Z","replies":["c-188.64.156.195-2016-04-11T09:45:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-08T16:38:00.000Z"]}}-->
Clinton's delegate count doesn't add up 188.64.156.195 (talk) 09:45, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-11T09:45:00.000Z","author":"188.64.156.195","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-188.64.156.195-2016-04-11T09:45:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-08T16:38:00.000Z","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-11T13:41:00.000Z-188.64.156.195-2016-04-11T09:45:00.000Z"]}}-->
Corrected.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 13:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-11T13:41:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":5,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-11T13:41:00.000Z-188.64.156.195-2016-04-11T09:45:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Please refrain from blanket changes of sources and results (particularly theseedits by @ThiefOfBagdad:) – NYT and AP were shown to list outdated results for many states, so they are not used as exclusive sources. Recently the involved editors had a long debate and reached a carefully-balanced position which was designed to match reality as closely as possible; let's go back to the consensus. Sorry I have no time to do it myself right now. — JFGtalk10:37, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z-Sources_stability","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T10:55:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T11:02:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T11:28:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","c-Guy1890-2016-04-05T03:51:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","c-JFG-2016-04-05T07:40:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z"]}}-->
I'm sorry, I just modified it, I had read in the Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2016's talk that we had to use Green Papers projections untill the official results are released. I undo my modify, but I underline that in this way we show different results in the page and in the table. Could it look inconsistent to the wiewers?--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 10:55, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T10:55:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T10:55:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Wait, but you were talking about the same debate in the page's talk, so I don't understand why the table reported wrong results, my modify was correct I undo again XD --EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 11:02, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T11:02:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T11:02:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Someone anonymous is changing the results not according to the agreed sources. What can we do?--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 11:28, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T11:28:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T11:28:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","replies":["c-JFG-2016-04-04T11:47:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T11:28:00.000Z"]}}-->
Thanks for your help. Several editors unaware of the consensus have intervened, so I think our best course of action is to restore the sourced delegate counts as they were standing in this version and then add relevant changes if any (Nevada?). Also ask IP editors to take their concerns to the talk page here. — JFGtalk11:47, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T11:47:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-JFG-2016-04-04T11:47:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T11:28:00.000Z","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T12:24:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T11:47:00.000Z"]}}-->
The numbers previously there did not match up to the total, and AP/NYT did not agree with the 156 total. I set the total to 149 and fixed the numbers to comply with AP. Remember that every major news source uses AP/NYT, not TGP.
I understand, but if you read our debate on the issue here you can see that according to the consensus achieved "The Green Papers are to be used for projections until the official results are published by The Associated Press.". According to this consensus we should use Green Papers projections untill the official results are released. Anyway about the total you are wrong. The total is correctly 156 (102 District-level delegates, 20 PLEOs, 34 At-Large delegates), as you can read in the table (pages 31-32) in the Illinois Delegate Selection Plan. Maybe you don't know that AP's projections are incomplete and just for this reason we prefer to use provisionally The Green Papers--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 12:24, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T12:24:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T12:24:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T11:47:00.000Z","replies":["c-JFG-2016-04-04T13:26:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T12:24:00.000Z"]}}-->
I just restored consensus sourcing on each state for clarity. — JFGtalk13:26, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-04T13:26:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":6,"id":"c-JFG-2016-04-04T13:26:00.000Z-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-04T12:24:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
The real solution here is likely to protect this template from any IP edits at all for the remainder of the caucus/primary process. Guy1890 (talk) 03:51, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-05T03:51:00.000Z","author":"Guy1890","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Guy1890-2016-04-05T03:51:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
This would be a welcome move indeed. Filing a request now. — JFGtalk07:40, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-05T07:40:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-JFG-2016-04-05T07:40:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-04T10:37:00.000Z","replies":["c-JFG-2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-05T07:40:00.000Z"]}}-->
Page semi-protected for a month. — JFGtalk16:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-JFG-2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-05T07:40:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Margins for Wisconsin are wide enough to call all pledged delegates (48 - 38)(in line with district chart Green Papers), have already adjusted WI Pages and templates, will check up on votes figures later on (minor changes possible). Please adjust USDem template asap to give an up to date picture of the race. Alain David (talk) 16:05, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-06T16:05:00.000Z","author":"Alain David","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alain_David-2016-04-06T16:05:00.000Z-Sources_stability","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-06T16:29:00.000Z-Alain_David-2016-04-06T16:05:00.000Z","c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-06T18:32:00.000Z-Alain_David-2016-04-06T16:05:00.000Z"]}}-->
I agree, if the District chart says 48-38 probably that will be the final projection. But Wikipedia isn't a newspaper and so, if there is no particular hurry, we can just wait for updates by The Green Papers. I'm sure that they are going to update as soon as possible.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 16:29, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-06T16:29:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-06T16:29:00.000Z-Alain_David-2016-04-06T16:05:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Updated.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 18:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-06T18:32:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-06T18:32:00.000Z-Alain_David-2016-04-06T16:05:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-71.35.189.237-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Available_delegate_totals_are_wrong-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z","replies":["c-71.35.189.237-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z-Available_delegate_totals_are_wrong"],"text":"Available delegate totals are wrong","linkableTitle":"Available delegate totals are wrong"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-71.35.189.237-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Available_delegate_totals_are_wrong-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z","replies":["c-71.35.189.237-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z-Available_delegate_totals_are_wrong"],"text":"Available delegate totals are wrong","linkableTitle":"Available delegate totals are wrong"}-->
In the table by state, the totals at the bottom for P U and T delegates for Bernie and Hillary are fine, but the last three columns with available delegates (those not yet committed, usually for states that have not yet had primaries/caucuses) is consistently wrong.
For example. There are a total of 4051 pledged delegates available. Since O'Malley got none, and no one else besides Bernie and Hillary have gotten any, that means the total for Hillary, Bernie, and available P columns should always add up to 4051, or very close. If is possible that some states may end up having some of the pledged delegates turned into uncommitted (that is possible in WA), but it is very unlikely.
Currently, uncommitted says 1266, which is clearly wrong.
71.35.189.237 (talk) 16:03, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z","author":"71.35.189.237","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-71.35.189.237-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z-Available_delegate_totals_are_wrong","replies":["c-JFG-2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z-71.35.189.237-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z"]}}-->
Thsnks, must have been a typo. Corrected to 1,747. — JFGtalk16:52, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-JFG-2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z-71.35.189.237-2016-04-05T16:03:00.000Z","replies":["c-Alankazame-2016-04-06T16:44:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z"]}}-->
Delegates count for Arizona is wrong -> http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/AZ-DAlankazame (talk) 16:44, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-06T16:44:00.000Z","author":"Alankazame","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Alankazame-2016-04-06T16:44:00.000Z-JFG-2016-04-05T16:52:00.000Z","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-06T17:16:00.000Z-Alankazame-2016-04-06T16:44:00.000Z"]}}-->
Corrected.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 17:16, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-06T17:16:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":4,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-06T17:16:00.000Z-Alankazame-2016-04-06T16:44:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z","replies":["c-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate","c-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T09:46:00.000Z-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate"],"text":"Are the Washington state delegates inaccurate","linkableTitle":"Are the Washington state delegates inaccurate"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z","replies":["c-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate","c-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T09:46:00.000Z-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate"],"text":"Are the Washington state delegates inaccurate","linkableTitle":"Are the Washington state delegates inaccurate"}-->
Are the Washington state pledged delegates inaccurate, because they still have a Primary coming up in addition to the Caucus they have already run.
see http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/2016-presidential-primary.aspx
I'm not informed enough to know but I wondered why there was a big difference for Washington between numbers here and the google delegate count (wherever that comes from) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.208.40.155 (talk) 08:49, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z","author":"121.208.40.155","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-10T08:56:00.000Z-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z"]}}-->
Obviously 74-27(37 with superdelegates) is not an official result, but waiting for it we show the TGP (source cited in the template) and the AP estimations.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 08:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-10T08:56:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-10T08:56:00.000Z-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T08:49:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
The NYTimes article states at the bottom disclaimer: **The Times estimated the 67 district-level delegates by using county vote totals and estimating each district’s share based on the county’s voting-age population.
So the 67 district level delegates are still up for grabs in the upcoming primary, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.208.40.155 (talk) 09:46, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-10T09:46:00.000Z","author":"121.208.40.155","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T09:46:00.000Z-Are_the_Washington_state_delegates_inaccurate","replies":["c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-10T10:16:00.000Z-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T09:46:00.000Z"]}}-->
The 67 district level delegates as the other categories of pledged delegates are allready allocated by The Green Papers and NYTimes according to their estimations and so we report 74-27 as they do. Anyway yes, the 67 district level delegates will be officially selecetd only on 5/21 at the congressional district caucus (it isn't an upcoming primary) by delegates elected at the legislative district caucuses (in the election day of 3/26).
At page 52 of the Washington State Delegate Selection Plan you can find a very clear table explaining how the process works.--EricCantonaTheKing (talk) 10:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-10T10:16:00.000Z","author":"EricCantonaTheKing","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-EricCantonaTheKing-2016-04-10T10:16:00.000Z-121.208.40.155-2016-04-10T09:46:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_16_April_2016-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z","replies":["c-2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_16_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2016"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_16_April_2016-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z","replies":["c-2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_16_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2016"}-->
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Sanders has now officially won 41 of Colorado's unpledged delegates to the National Democratic Convention, while Clinton has only received 25.
http://www.denverpost.com/election/ci_29775876/bernie-sanders-bests-hillary-clinton-at-colorado-democratic-convention
Sanders has also increased his unpledged delegate totals from primary or caucus days in, at least, the following other states: Missouri and Nevada. Please update totals and percentages to reflect these facts.
2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5 (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z","author":"2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_16_April_2016","replies":["c-2001:558:6025:5C:4489:7AB4:48D1:2B38-2016-04-16T21:27:00.000Z-2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z","c-JFG-2016-04-16T22:41:00.000Z-2601:1C2:E00:E7FA:3DB2:B01C:EE1:95A5-2016-04-16T21:20:00.000Z"]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-66.207.16.170-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_19_April_2016-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-66.207.16.170-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_19_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2016"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-66.207.16.170-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_19_April_2016-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-66.207.16.170-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_19_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2016"}-->
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The spreadsheet is wrong due to the caucus states. Hillary Clinton has actually lost some of her pledged delegates to Bernie Sanders for people not showing up to continue caucusing for Clinton. The state of Nevada has actually now flipped to being a Bernie State.
66.207.16.170 (talk) 20:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z","author":"66.207.16.170","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-66.207.16.170-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_19_April_2016","replies":["c-Knowledgekid87-2016-04-19T20:59:00.000Z-66.207.16.170-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z"]}}-->
Not done We are waiting for the final certified state results in May. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-19T20:59:00.000Z","author":"Knowledgekid87","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Knowledgekid87-2016-04-19T20:59:00.000Z-66.207.16.170-2016-04-19T20:42:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_21_April_2016-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_21_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2016"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_21_April_2016-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_21_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2016"}-->
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Would be nice to see total number of votes and percentages at the bottom, to get a feel for how democratic the process actually is.
Currently (after New York) this would be:
Clinton: 10,486,727 (57.28%)
Sanders: 7,819,822 (42.72%)
-145.23.254.101 (talk) 11:42, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","author":"145.23.254.101","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_21_April_2016","replies":["c-Guy1890-2016-04-22T01:35:00.000Z-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","c-Clpo13-2016-04-23T19:45:00.000Z-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z"]}}-->
Nope - there have been numerous discussions about this issue in many different forums on Wikipedia as of this late date, and they've all ended up so far stating that we shouldn't be doing that, since there's really no such thing as a national "popular vote" in this kind of nationwide Party process. Guy1890 (talk) 01:35, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-22T01:35:00.000Z","author":"Guy1890","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Guy1890-2016-04-22T01:35:00.000Z-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. clpo13(talk)19:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-23T19:45:00.000Z","author":"Clpo13","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Clpo13-2016-04-23T19:45:00.000Z-145.23.254.101-2016-04-21T11:42:00.000Z","replies":["c-Cameron11598-2016-04-26T00:58:00.000Z-Clpo13-2016-04-23T19:45:00.000Z"]}}-->
Note: Marking request as answered --Cameron11598(Converse)00:58, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-26T00:58:00.000Z","author":"Cameron11598","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Cameron11598-2016-04-26T00:58:00.000Z-Clpo13-2016-04-23T19:45:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Today's results (27 Apr) have been updated in the table but the totals still show the old values. Can someone update? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.23.139 (talk) 04:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-27T04:55:00.000Z","author":"99.236.23.139","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-99.236.23.139-2016-04-27T04:55:00.000Z-Totals_wrong","replies":["c-Guy1890-2016-04-29T05:07:00.000Z-99.236.23.139-2016-04-27T04:55:00.000Z"]}}-->
The numbers in this template that have needed to be updated recently have been done so accurately. Guy1890 (talk) 05:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-29T05:07:00.000Z","author":"Guy1890","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Guy1890-2016-04-29T05:07:00.000Z-99.236.23.139-2016-04-27T04:55:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-Alexxbrookss-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z","replies":["c-Alexxbrookss-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016","c-67.82.78.237-2016-05-02T20:38:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2016"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-Alexxbrookss-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z","replies":["c-Alexxbrookss-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016","c-67.82.78.237-2016-05-02T20:38:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016"],"text":"Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2016","linkableTitle":"Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2016"}-->
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The total delegate count at the end of the table need to be altered to include the results from the 27 April primaries - Clinton's total should be 1640, Sanders' total should be 1334.
Alexxbrookss (talk) 08:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z","author":"Alexxbrookss","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Alexxbrookss-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016","replies":["c-Guy1890-2016-04-29T05:06:00.000Z-Alexxbrookss-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z"]}}-->
The numbers in this template that have needed to be updated recently have been done so accurately. Guy1890 (talk) 05:06, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-04-29T05:06:00.000Z","author":"Guy1890","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Guy1890-2016-04-29T05:06:00.000Z-Alexxbrookss-2016-04-27T08:16:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
Your super delegate count is wrong. Clinton has 520 and sanders has 39. Why is your count so far off from all other sites, including The New York Times. You have Clinton at 498 and sanders at 39???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.82.78.237 (talk) 20:38, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-05-02T20:38:00.000Z","author":"67.82.78.237","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-67.82.78.237-2016-05-02T20:38:00.000Z-Semi-protected_edit_request_on_27_April_2016","replies":["c-Guy1890-2016-05-03T01:22:00.000Z-67.82.78.237-2016-05-02T20:38:00.000Z"]}}-->
FWIW, there's a an ongoing discussion about the issue that the IP editor (with no other contributions to Wikipedia before) raises immediately above. The short answer though is that we have our own reliably-sourced Wikipedia article listing each superdelegate and how they have "pledged" to vote at the Democratic National Convention this summer. Guy1890 (talk) 01:22, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-05-03T01:22:00.000Z","author":"Guy1890","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Guy1890-2016-05-03T01:22:00.000Z-67.82.78.237-2016-05-02T20:38:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
For consistency with the results of the relevant RfC, I just added the popular vote total here at the bottom of the table, sourced from The Green Papers like the bulk of the table, with the agreed-upon footnote mentioning excluded states. I don't think it's necessary to start yet another debate on this issue, but of course editors opposed to this move can feel free to revert and discuss. — JFGtalk07:16, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-05-13T07:16:00.000Z","author":"JFG","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-JFG-2016-05-13T07:16:00.000Z-Popular_vote_total","replies":[]}}-->
Raja Siam dan the King and I character dialihkan ke halaman ini. Untuk The King and I#Peran utama dan penampil terkenal, lihat novel. Untuk Anna and the King of Siam (novel), lihat Raja Siam (disambiguasi). King Thailandพระมหากษัตริย์ไทยStandar KerajaanSedang berkuasaMaha Vajiralongkorn (Rama X)sejak 13 Oktober 2016 PerincianPewarisDipangkorn RasmijotiPenguasa pertamaSri Indraditya of SukhothaiPembentukan1238KediamanIstana Besar Thailand Artikel ini adal...
Selección de fútbol de las Islas Vírgenes Británicas Datos generalesPaís Islas Vírgenes BritánicasCódigo FIFA VGBFederación Asociación de Fútbol de las Islas Vírgenes BritánicasConfederación CONCACAFSeudónimo(s) The Nature BoyzSeleccionador Chris Kiwomya[1] (desde 2021-)Capitán Troy Caesar[2] Más goles Avondale Williams (5)Más partidos Carlos Septus (24)Clasificación FIFA 207.º (noviembre de 2023)Estadio(s) Campo recreativo A.O. ShirleyEquipaciones Prim...
La Ley 21.483, conocida como Ley Tamara, es una ley chilena cuyo objetivo es proteger a menores de edad, adultos mayores y personas con discapacidad de delitos de distintas índoles, como violación, secuestro u homicidio, aumentando las penas de quienes sean responsables. Esta tiene como base la vulnerabilidad que caracteriza a estas víctimas en casos violentos que requieren capacidades de defensa personal. Fue propuesta en 2021 y su nombre popular es en memoria de Tamara Moya, una menor de...
هذه المقالة يتيمة إذ تصل إليها مقالات أخرى قليلة جدًا. فضلًا، ساعد بإضافة وصلة إليها في مقالات متعلقة بها. (نوفمبر 2021) إجمالي الهامش الربحي (بالإنجليزية Gross profit margin) هو الفرق بين الإيرادات وتكلفة البضائع المباعة (COGS) مقسومًا على الإيرادات. يتم التعبير عن الهامش الإجمالي كنسبة
Untuk judul filmnya, lihat Marmut Merah Jambu (film). Marmut Merah Jambu SeriesGenre Drama Roman Remaja Komedi PembuatKharisma Starvision PlusTerinspirasi olehMarmut Merah Jambuoleh Raditya DikaDitulis oleh Raditya Dika Isman HS Skenario Raditya Dika Isman HS SutradaraRaditya DikaPemeran Christoffer Nelwan Julian Liberty Annisa Rawles Fahira Al Idrus Tommy Kaganangan Ponco Buwono Unique Priscilla Fanny Fabriana Penggubah lagu temaThe NelwansLagu pembukaMarmut Merah Jambu — The NelwansLagu p...
Halaman ini berisi artikel tentang pemerintahan terdevolusi kontemporer. Untuk pemerintah Skotlandia sebelum Acts of Union, lihat Pemerintahan di Skotlandia pada abad pertengahan dan Pemerintahan di Skotlandia pada masa modern awal. Pemerintah Skotlandiabahasa Gaelik Skotlandia: Riaghaltas na h-Albabahasa Skots: Scots GovrenmentInformasiDidirikan1 Juli 1999PemimpinMenteri PertamaDitetapkan olehMenteri Pertama diangkat oleh Penguasa sesuai persetujuan parlementer, persetujuan kementeri...
Pour les articles homonymes, voir Union des femmes. Union des femmes pour la défense de Paris et les soins aux blessésHistoireFondation 11 avril 1871Dissolution Mai 1871CadreType Mouvement féministe, association de femmesSiège Mairie du 10e arrondissement de ParisPays FranceOrganisationFondatrices Nathalie Lemel, Élisabeth DmitrieffIdéologie Féminismemodifier - modifier le code - modifier Wikidata L'Union des femmes pour la défense de Paris et les soins aux blessés est un des p...
Natural satellite orbiting Earth This article is about Earth's natural satellite. For moons in general, see Natural satellite. For other uses, see Moon (disambiguation). MoonThe near side of the Moon (north at top) as seen from EarthDesignationsDesignationEarth IAlternative namesLunaSelene (poetic)Cynthia (poetic)AdjectivesLunarSelenian (poetic)Cynthian (poetic)Moonly (poetic)Symbol or Orbital characteristicsEpoch J2000Perigee362600 km(356400–370400 km)Apogee405400 km(404000...
Yemeni Islamic scholar (1814 – 1892) This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.Find sources: Abdullah Ibn Umar Badheeb Al Yamani – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (August 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) For Marxist politician and theorist, see Abdullah Badheeb.SaintAbdullah I...
Xherdan Shaqiri Shaqiri dengan Tim nasional sepak bola Swiss Di Piala Dunia 2018Informasi pribadiNama lengkap Xherdan ShaqiriTanggal lahir 10 Oktober 1991 (umur 32)Tempat lahir Gnjilane, YugoslaviaTinggi 1,69 m (5 ft 6+1⁄2 in)[1]Posisi bermain Gelandang serangInformasi klubKlub saat ini Chicago Fire FCNomor 10Karier junior1999–2001 SV Augst2001–2009 FC BaselKarier senior*Tahun Tim Tampil (Gol)2007–2009 FC Basel U-21 19 (8)2009–2012 FC Basel 92 (18)201...
Donatella Versace, 2010. Donatella Versace (lahir 2 Mei 1955) adalah perancang busana, model dan pebisnis berkebangsaan dari Italia. Donatella adalah adik dari perancang busana Italia terkenal lain, Gianni Versace, pendiri perusahaan Versace. Kini Donatella adalah Wakil Presiden Grup Versace dan Ketua Perancang di Versace. Donatella Versace memegang 20% saham Versace. Kakaknya, Santo Versace, memiliki 30%, kemudian anak Donatella dan keponakan Gianni Versace, Allegra Versace diwariskan 50% sa...
Pile hitchCategoryHitchTypical useAttaching rope to a pole or other structureABoK#1815 The pile hitch is a kind of hitch, which is a knot used for attaching rope to a pole or other structure. The pile hitch is very easy to tie and can be tied in the bight, without access to either end of the rope, making it a valuable tool. Tying To tie, form a loop in the bight, and wrap both strands of this loop around the pole near the pole's end. Pull the loop around and under the rope, then finish by put...
Asian competition television series For the Got Talent international franchise, see Got Talent. Asia's Got TalentGenreInteractive talent competitionCreated bySimon Cowell (Syco)Based onGot Talent franchiseDirected bySimon YinPresented by Marc Nelson Rovilson Fernandez Alan M. Wong Justin Bratton Judges David Foster Anggun Vanness Wu Melanie C Jay Park Original languagesEnglish (main language)Various (based on local country broadcast)No. of seasons3No. of episodes30ProductionExecutive producer...
Nissan Ireland Ltd.TypeSubsidiaryIndustryAutomotiveFounded2 February 1977; 46 years ago (1977-02-02)HeadquartersDublin, IrelandProductsAutomobilesParentNissanWebsitewww.nissan.ie Nissan Ireland Ltd. is the Irish subsidiary of Nissan Motor Company of Japan. With an assembly plant for motor vehicles, it was part of the automotive industry in Ireland.[1] Company history The company was founded in Dublin on 2 February 1977.[2] This was preceded by a relationship ...
2010 American film by Mike Mills For other uses, see Beginner. BeginnersPromotional posterDirected byMike MillsWritten byMike MillsProduced by Leslie Urdang Dean Vanech Miranda de Pencier Jay Van Hoy Lars Knudsen Starring Ewan McGregor Christopher Plummer Mélanie Laurent Goran Višnjić CinematographyKasper TuxenEdited byOlivier Bugge CouttéMusic by Roger Neill David Palmer Brian Reitzell Jelly Roll Morton Productioncompanies Olympus Pictures Parts & Labor Northwood Productions Distribu...
John OrtizLahir23 Mei 1968 (umur 55)Brooklyn, New York, Amerika SerikatPekerjaanAktorTahun aktif1992–sekarang John Ortiz (lahir 23 Mei 1968) adalah aktor dan pengarah artistik asal Amerika Serikat. Kehidupan pribadi Ia adalah keturunan Puerto Riko yang lahir dan dibesarkan di Bushwick, Brooklyn, New York. Ortiz tinggal di borough ini bersama istri dan putranya sampai tahun 2010. Setelah itu mereka pindah ke California sampai sekarang.[1] Filmografi Tahun Film Peran Catatan...
Zoo in Ponteland, Northumberland Northumberland College Zoo55°5′21.2″N 1°45′58.94″W / 55.089222°N 1.7663722°W / 55.089222; -1.7663722Date opened26 May 2011LocationPonteland, Northumberland, EnglandNo. of speciesOver 200MembershipsBIAZAWebsitehttps://www.northumberland.ac.uk/for-visitors/northumberland-college-zoo/ Northumberland College Zoo is a zoo located in Ponteland, Northumberland. Based within the 400-acre (160 ha) Kirkley Hall College campus, wh...
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libelous.Find sources: Boom Jinx – news...
