397:
or parties with the most votes" are elected what is winner-take-all if not FPTP? and if FPTP it is not necessarily majoritarian. better to try to sort out election system by whether elect multiple or single members and then where single members elected, for each whether plurality or majoritarian is used, and for multiple members whether plurality or majoritarian or PR is used. If we call FPTP majoritarian does not leave opening for a term to describe diff between IRV and FPTP. Under FPTP, often the majority of votes are not used to elect the winner, so it is not majoritarian consistently.
74:
53:
84:
22:
449:
or parties with the most votes" are elected what is winner-take-all if not FPTP? and if FPTP it is not necessarily majoritarian. better to try to sort out election system by whether elect multiple or single members and then where single members elected, for each whether plurality or majoritarian is used, and for multiple members whether plurality or majoritarian or PR is used.
310:, it should focus on multi-member systems (one or more multi-winner districts or multiple single winner districts) where the winner takes all in a district, with the appropriate references to single-winner majority or plurality rule systems and multi-winner systems that use the plurality or majority rule but provide semi-proportional represenation (limited voting, sntv, etc)
392:
Article seems to miss mark plurality (FPTP) is where no regard for whether winner has majority or minority of votes majoritarian systems IMO is where winner must have majority of votes IRV PR is where multiple parties are represented in district (whatever district or pooling is used) and majority of
377:
Sounds good. Nothing wrong with having a page on winner-take-all that mentions this is called "majoritarian representation" in some subfields (which it is). If you think there's enough material for an article here (instead of just a disambiguation page), that seems fine. I'd agree winner-take-all is
362:
I created disambiguation "majoritarian electoral system" to start. I think this article should still exists in some form, it is one of the two major types of electoral systems referred to most commonly, cannot be just split up. But it could be renamed winner-take-all, unfortunately, most commonly it
448:
the statement "A majoritarian electoral system is an electoral system where the candidates or parties with the most votes takes all seats (in a district) using the winner-takes-all principle and in this way provides majoritarian representation." all proper election systems do this: "the candidates
396:
the statement "A majoritarian electoral system is an electoral system where the candidates or parties with the most votes takes all seats (in a district) using the winner-takes-all principle and in this way provides majoritarian representation." all proper election systems do this: "the candidates
405:
The introduction to this article is extremely long and rambling, going into far more detail than an introduction should - and, for me, is quite difficult to understand. I wonder if the bits which compare it to other voting systems should be turned into a section in the article? Unfortunately I
301:
Doing a major rework to update this page to be a good overview of all systems commonly referred to as majoritarian, not just at-large (block voting), so it can be a counterpart on the level of the article on
456:
243:
239:
225:
162:"Nowadays, at-large majoritarian representation is no longer used for national elections," - what, so UK general elections using FPTP are not considered national?!
140:
483:
130:
445:
PR is where multiple parties are represented in district (whatever district or pooling is used) and majority of votes are used to elect the winners.
460:
488:
478:
106:
378:
a better name because it's unambiguous, though we should mention the same idea is sometimes called "majoritarian representation".–Sincerely,
172:
221:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
97:
58:
33:
165:
This page is all wrong. All the voting systems where you have only one persone elected per constituency are
Majoritarian
286:
425:
379:
368:
354:
315:
303:
195:
439:
Article seems to miss mark plurality (FPTP) is where no regard for whether winner has majority or minority of votes
329:
my suggestion would be to try and find anything salvageable in this article and transfer that into the articles on
455:
Under FPTP, often the majority of votes are not used to elect the winner, so it is not majoritarian consistently.
242:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
411:
39:
21:
211:
452:
If we call FPTP majoritarian, that does not leave opening for a term to describe diff between IRV and FPTP.
277:
203:
176:
168:
421:
364:
346:
330:
326:
311:
199:
407:
261:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
249:
105:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
202:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
337:. Then we can turn this into a disambiguation page (since "majoritarian" is variously used to mean
246:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
262:
342:
269:
89:
228:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
268:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
235:
83:
73:
52:
472:
338:
350:
334:
464:
429:
415:
382:
372:
357:
319:
291:
180:
234:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
79:
406:
don't know enough about the subject to be confident about doing it right.
212:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110625044436/http://acm.uva.es/p/v4/435.html
442:
majoritarian systems IMO is where winner must have majority of votes IRV
102:
297:
Majoritarian representation vs. majoritarian-at-large vs majority rule
215:
15:
206:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
101:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
238:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
224:This message was posted before February 2018.
8:
19:
194:I have just modified one external link on
166:
47:
363:is referred to as majoritarian instead.
49:
393:votes are used to elect the winners.
7:
115:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Politics
95:This article is within the scope of
38:It is of interest to the following
14:
484:High-importance politics articles
198:. Please take a moment to review
420:I have tried worked on it since
82:
72:
51:
20:
306:. As it is called majoritarian
216:http://acm.uva.es/p/v4/435.html
135:This article has been rated as
457:2604:3D09:8880:11E0:0:0:0:7044
1:
489:WikiProject Politics articles
479:Start-Class politics articles
118:Template:WikiProject Politics
109:and see a list of open tasks.
292:16:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
181:13:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
320:21:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
304:Proportional representation
196:Majoritarian representation
505:
430:18:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
255:(last update: 5 June 2024)
191:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
141:project's importance scale
416:17:06, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
134:
67:
46:
465:20:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
435:FPTP is not majoritarian
383:17:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
373:09:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
358:19:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
347:single-member districts
331:single-member districts
187:External links modified
28:This article is rated
32:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
236:regular verification
98:WikiProject Politics
226:After February 2018
280:InternetArchiveBot
231:InternetArchiveBot
158:National elections
34:content assessment
422:Rankedchoicevoter
365:Rankedchoicevoter
343:Condorcet methods
327:Rankedchoicevoter
312:Rankedchoicevoter
256:
183:
171:comment added by
155:
154:
151:
150:
147:
146:
121:politics articles
496:
290:
281:
254:
253:
232:
123:
122:
119:
116:
113:
92:
87:
86:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
504:
503:
499:
498:
497:
495:
494:
493:
469:
468:
437:
403:
353:). –Sincerely,
299:
284:
279:
247:
240:have permission
230:
204:this simple FaQ
189:
160:
137:High-importance
120:
117:
114:
111:
110:
90:Politics portal
88:
81:
62:High‑importance
61:
29:
12:
11:
5:
502:
500:
492:
491:
486:
481:
471:
470:
436:
433:
408:Knole Jonathan
402:
399:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
385:
308:representation
298:
295:
274:
273:
266:
219:
218:
210:Added archive
188:
185:
159:
156:
153:
152:
149:
148:
145:
144:
133:
127:
126:
124:
107:the discussion
94:
93:
77:
65:
64:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
501:
490:
487:
485:
482:
480:
477:
476:
474:
467:
466:
462:
458:
453:
450:
446:
443:
440:
434:
432:
431:
427:
423:
418:
417:
413:
409:
400:
398:
394:
384:
381:
376:
375:
374:
370:
366:
361:
360:
359:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
339:majority rule
336:
332:
328:
324:
323:
322:
321:
317:
313:
309:
305:
296:
294:
293:
288:
283:
282:
271:
267:
264:
260:
259:
258:
251:
245:
241:
237:
233:
227:
222:
217:
213:
209:
208:
207:
205:
201:
197:
192:
186:
184:
182:
178:
174:
170:
163:
157:
142:
138:
132:
129:
128:
125:
108:
104:
100:
99:
91:
85:
80:
78:
75:
71:
70:
66:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
454:
451:
447:
444:
441:
438:
419:
404:
401:Introduction
395:
391:
351:block voting
335:block voting
307:
300:
278:
275:
250:source check
229:
223:
220:
193:
190:
173:90.46.35.244
167:— Preceding
164:
161:
136:
96:
40:WikiProjects
30:Start-class
473:Categories
287:Report bug
270:this tool
263:this tool
276:Cheers.—
169:unsigned
112:Politics
103:politics
59:Politics
200:my edit
139:on the
380:A Lime
355:A Lime
349:, and
36:scale.
461:talk
426:talk
412:talk
369:talk
333:and
316:talk
177:talk
131:High
244:RfC
214:to
475::
463:)
428:)
414:)
371:)
345:,
341:,
318:)
257:.
252:}}
248:{{
179:)
459:(
424:(
410:(
367:(
325:@
314:(
289:)
285:(
272:.
265:.
175:(
143:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
