The Signpost

+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

  • Your report conveniently excludes one vital statistic: 5 of the non-elected candidates nevertheless gained in excess of the seat-qualifying 50%. Compare that with previous years' elections. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:23, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That's not really an outlier. There have been plenty of years in "recent" (i.e. SecurePoll-run elections) where many candidates had >50% supports but were far from getting a seat. Look at WP:ACE2013 or WP:ACE2012 for instance. Last year was a relative anomaly. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 13:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Label the axes of the graphs? czar 21:51, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I do like that graph! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:55, 12 December 2015 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  • Love the huge increase in editor !voting! And Congratulations to everyone!--Mark Miller (talk) 00:52, 13 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Regarding an explanation for the "major drop in opposes," that's easy, I didn't run this year! Congratulations to the winners. Wbm1058 (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0