Talk:U.S. Electoral College: Difference between revisions
imported>Anthony Argyriou (slightly modify suggestions) |
imported>Steve Mount |
||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
I plan to flesh out the "criticism" section with some arguments made in favor of keeping the EC, but I need to spend some more time digging. [[User:Anthony Argyriou|Anthony Argyriou]] 15:53, 1 May 2007 (CDT) | I plan to flesh out the "criticism" section with some arguments made in favor of keeping the EC, but I need to spend some more time digging. [[User:Anthony Argyriou|Anthony Argyriou]] 15:53, 1 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
:Sorry about that, I didn't see the moved info about Maine and Nebraska - obviously, the info I added back in should be taken out to avoid duplication. I'll check my source for the date of Nebraka's change (and note it on the page as well, for future reference). [[User:Steve Mount|Steve Mount]] 16:02, 1 May 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 15:02, 1 May 2007
Workgroup category or categories | Politics Workgroup [Categories OK] |
Article status | Developed article: complete or nearly so |
Underlinked article? | No |
Basic cleanup done? | Yes |
Checklist last edited by | Larry Sanger 19:31, 15 March 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
This could probably be longer, but I'm marking it as a "developed" article. Feel free to overrule me. --Larry Sanger 19:33, 15 March 2007 (CDT)
- "Developed" or not, I've made some significant structural changes, accompanied by some minor rewrites and a big addition of text. I think a little more work would put it close to being ready for approval. Anthony Argyriou 11:52, 29 April 2007 (CDT)
Maine and Nebraska
I'd moved the information about Maine and Nebraska to History of selection of electors, and modified the wording somewhat. Since then, Steve Mount has restored the original Maine & Nebraska section. There is a significant disagreement about the date of Nebraska making its change, which needs to be resolved.
I'd suggest: make the Selection of electors section a higher-level section, with history as one subsection and present-day practice as another; the present-day practice subsection will be mostly about Maine & Nebraska and "faithless electors". Some discussion of 1968 would be worthwhile in the history section. A "selection of electors" section may even belong ahead of the general electoral college history, though if that's done, the history of selecting electors should be left in the general history section.
I plan to flesh out the "criticism" section with some arguments made in favor of keeping the EC, but I need to spend some more time digging. Anthony Argyriou 15:53, 1 May 2007 (CDT)
- Sorry about that, I didn't see the moved info about Maine and Nebraska - obviously, the info I added back in should be taken out to avoid duplication. I'll check my source for the date of Nebraka's change (and note it on the page as well, for future reference). Steve Mount 16:02, 1 May 2007 (CDT)
- Politics Category Check
- General Category Check
- Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Politics Advanced Articles
- Politics Nonstub Articles
- Politics Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- Politics Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- Politics Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- Politics Stub Articles
- External Articles
- Politics External Articles
- Politics Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Politics Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- Cleanup