Talk:1990 Romanian general election

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Romanian general election, 1990. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205171123/http://www2.essex.ac.uk/elect/database/indexElections.asp?country=ROMANIA&election=ro90s to http://www2.essex.ac.uk/elect/database/indexElections.asp?country=ROMANIA&election=ro90s
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205171131/http://www2.essex.ac.uk/elect/database/indexElections.asp?country=ROMANIA&election=ro90cd to http://www2.essex.ac.uk/elect/database/indexElections.asp?country=ROMANIA&election=ro90cd

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) 13:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Rațiu in infobox survey

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Regarding this edit, I firmly believe Rațiu should be included in the infobox. As anyone with even a cursory knowledge of that period in Romanian history knows, the 1990 election had three candidates, all of whom made a major impact. The fact that Rațiu didn’t hit an arbitrary threshold (informed by the two-party American system) really isn’t a reason to exclude him. The average reader minimally informed about this election will be surprised not to see Rațiu there, and we shouldn’t do that. Rather, we should ignore all rules and put him where he belongs. — Biruitorul ^Talk 22:26, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support as proposer. — Biruitorul ^Talk 22:26, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose per the 5% standard. I don't see any special reason here to ignore the rule – the winning candidate received 85% of the vote, so it's not like Rațiu's participation significantly influenced the result by taking votes away from the runner-up. Cheers, Number 57 22:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I would say that the source after source after source after source after source after source after source after source after source after source after source after source exclusively or largely commenting on the Rațiu campaign 20-30 years after the fact rather speaks for itself.

No, in a strictly numerical sense, Rațiu did not affect the basically predetermined outcome, but the moral significance of his campaign, by pointing out that a different path was possible for his country, was far larger than the arithmetic suggests, and continues to reverberate. The arbitrary cutoff should be ignored for this reason. — Biruitorul ^Talk 23:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Why should this rule (where it is written down? Link please?) affect the Romanian article discussed here? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:37, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

See here. Cheers, Number 57 09:00, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57That's fair, but per WP:IAR sometimes exceptions make sense. I think Biruitorul's argument is worth considering. Outside of "but there is a rule", what do you think about it? Their argument of it in this particular case, I mean. I am still on the fence voting but I am leaning towards the support view. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:10, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

I agree exceptions can make sense, but personally I don't feel this is an occasion where it does given the outcome of the election. However, I'm clearly in the minority on this, so my views won't matter. This may just be me coming at this from a WP:E&R perspective (seeking consistency across election articles) while others commenting are from a WP:ROMANIA perspective and not interested in the aforementioned consistency. Anyway, this is not something I'm massively annoyed about; it's just a conversation in which I'm giving my viewpoint. Cheers, Number 57 17:17, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support, per the reasons given by the proposer, and also per the specific wording of the just quoted rule, which concludes with, "as always, appropriate exceptions may be made via local consensus." Turgidson (talk) 14:20, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support. I've got nothing else to say that hasn't been said by other editors already. Super Ψ Dro 14:38, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
• Neutral. The rule is meant to prevent huge infoboxes, and should generally be applied. However, here we have just 3 candidates, listing them all won't greatly affect readability.Anonimu (talk) 18:41, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
• Support, as argued by the proposer above. Rațiu's presidential bid was exceptional by the 1990 Romanian standards. Mentatus (talk) 06:44, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can someone please make an electoral map for the infobox?

Hello! I truly hope this message finds you well! Can someone please make an electoral map for the infobox, as it was made for the 1996 Romanian general election? Possibly the same user who made that map please? That would be very good, encyclopaedic, and informative in my humble opinion. Thank you very much in advance! All the best!

Sincerely and respectfully,
Rosenborg BK Fan (talk) 15:22, 11 August 2023 (UTC)