Talk:Croatian parliamentary election, 2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Izborilogo.JPG
Image:Izborilogo.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 21:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deleted polls?!?
Why the polls left are is without references? Why are additional explanations missing? --Marko Jurcic (talk) 19:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sources?
I know it's still a little early, but how about providing some sources for the summary of votes/seats? Ilva (talk) 22:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
- Huh, this article has very few sources. I will now try to reference what I can and delete the rest. People should reference their edits. --Dijxtra (talk) 22:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Huh? I put all the sourcs for the polls, and someone delited it over the night. It is yours do redo that!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.131.38.86 (talk) 13:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I will try to do this here. I really don't have any more time to spend if someone will delete my work. I put all the polls results by months, together with sources. Someone made a table and deleted all the sources. Now the table is gone as well. I will put here all the references for the polls, but also please return the polls table. I have no time to find out how to redo things so please do this for me. It is very interesting to see that the polls are opposite of the election results. --213.191.147.34 18:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I searched the history, and couldn't find the edits you are talking about. --Dijxtra 01:13, 2 December 2007
-
-
-
(UTC)
-
-
-
-
- That is your fucking problem.
-
-
-
[edit] Parliament of Croatia article
There is a lot of information in this article that ought to be replicated at Parliament of Croatia, for example, regarding the electoral districts and reserved seats, since that's part of the structure of the parliament and not just a feature of this election. The parliament's article seems much less detailed than this article in general, I suppose this is a sign of "recentism" and the extra availability of news sources at events like elections compared to the usual paucity of English language sources on the political system itself... Purgatorio (talk) 00:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right, but: electoral law changes through time, in last 20 years it changed twice. So I think we should have this data in both articles or something like that... --Dijxtra (talk) 09:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed, the relevant law should certainly be in the article for each election, since it changes from time to time. I'm not complaining about redundancy: because articles should "stand alone" to some extent, redundancy can actually be a good thing. But I do think it would be good if some of this information was added to the parliament article too. Purgatorio 18:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
