Template talk:Croatian elections
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I'd like to add the pre-Communist elections in the table, but am a little confused as to exactly just how to do it. Any help? --PaxEquilibrium 18:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Well the Croatian Parliament, among other...--PaxEquilibrium 07:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- So, put them in :) If there were ever any Senate elections, perhaps we can use the "Upper House" solution from the Yugoslavian elections template? Number 57 07:56, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ah.. it's a bit hard to explain. From 1939 to 1941 a "Croatian Banate" has existed within the Kingdom of Yugoslavia and I would've made no quarrels regarding adding elections to the Croatian Parliament (that was supposed to be elected in '41, but the Axis invaded, hence it used only nominated deputies from '39). However before, the "Croatian Parliament" was a governing body of an entity within the Austria-Hungarian Monarchy (its Magyar part) known as the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia created according to the Hungaro-Croatian Compromise of 1868; after the Great War it joined Serbia into a South Slavic state and was abolished in 1922. And as you see, that' not quite "Croatia", and especially notice the border differences. And Dalmatia, was a separate Austrian crownland that had its own "Dalmatian Parliament" from 1861 to 1922... are you following me? --PaxEquilibrium 20:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmmm. I would still attempt to include them under parliamentary elections, as even if the borders moved, it is still Croatia (we count German elections before WWI and Polish elections before WWII, even though their borders were markedly different from today). I would not include the Dalmatian ones - that sounds like a special case. I think we should get comment from our resident Austrian though! Number 57 08:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Mh, it's difficult. I'd either be in favour of having an own template for Croatia-Slavonia and Dalmatia, or for including them in here but in their own rows, as they *are* different entities... —Nightstallion 10:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmmm. I would still attempt to include them under parliamentary elections, as even if the borders moved, it is still Croatia (we count German elections before WWI and Polish elections before WWII, even though their borders were markedly different from today). I would not include the Dalmatian ones - that sounds like a special case. I think we should get comment from our resident Austrian though! Number 57 08:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ah.. it's a bit hard to explain. From 1939 to 1941 a "Croatian Banate" has existed within the Kingdom of Yugoslavia and I would've made no quarrels regarding adding elections to the Croatian Parliament (that was supposed to be elected in '41, but the Axis invaded, hence it used only nominated deputies from '39). However before, the "Croatian Parliament" was a governing body of an entity within the Austria-Hungarian Monarchy (its Magyar part) known as the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia created according to the Hungaro-Croatian Compromise of 1868; after the Great War it joined Serbia into a South Slavic state and was abolished in 1922. And as you see, that' not quite "Croatia", and especially notice the border differences. And Dalmatia, was a separate Austrian crownland that had its own "Dalmatian Parliament" from 1861 to 1922... are you following me? --PaxEquilibrium 20:58, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Istria
Should I include Istria too? --PaxEquilibrium 23:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, but on the condition that Istria and Dalmatia and Slavonia are clearly differentiated somehow... —Nightstallion 01:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- ? --PaxEquilibrium 01:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Let me rephrase that: What do you mean? --PaxEquilibrium 14:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- We shouldn't simply mix Croatian-Slavonian, Dalmatian and Istrian elections in the same row, IMO. —Nightstallion 10:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Croatia-Slavonia was a single crownland, with the Croatian Parliament.
- I've decided to leave out Istria. I'm keeping only the so-called "Triune Kingdom of Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia" which was never realized in accordance to Greater Croatian movements back then. --PaxEquilibrium 13:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I *meant* Cr-Sl. —Nightstallion 16:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- We shouldn't simply mix Croatian-Slavonian, Dalmatian and Istrian elections in the same row, IMO. —Nightstallion 10:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Parliament" controversy
This brings me to another problem (Number 57'll know what I'm talking about). Those pre-1990 parliaments are actually elected in the same way the "Chamber of Counties" was... --PaxEquilibrium 23:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- ? From reading Croatian Chamber of Counties election, 1993, it seems that it was a popular vote, but done on a multi-member constituency basis? Or is my interpretation wrong, and they were actually elected by local councillors? Number 57 23:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- Local elections were organized in each county. Every county gave a specific amount of deputies. When all elections are over and deputies nominated, the Parliament is constructed. That's how's the Vojvodinian parliamentary election today. That's how most elections were back then. There weren't nation-wide like today. And if you ask me, they should've stayed that way. --PaxEquilibrium 00:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Having read the Vojvodina election articles, it sounds similar to constituency voting for the National Assembly of France, in which case they should be included, no doubt. Number 57 00:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yup. But you misunderstood - should I move them all to the "Chamber of Counties" bit? --PaxEquilibrium 00:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, make it "upper house" as in the other case, I s'pose. —Nightstallion 01:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I would keep them in the parliamentary elections section. If they were the only body at the time, they couldn't really be described as the Upper House - how they are elected is irrelevant to their status as upper/lower, as electoral systems change over time. Number 57 10:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry, I misunderstood that. Yes, electoral systems are not of importance, they should remain in the first row. —Nightstallion 13:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, I would keep them in the parliamentary elections section. If they were the only body at the time, they couldn't really be described as the Upper House - how they are elected is irrelevant to their status as upper/lower, as electoral systems change over time. Number 57 10:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, make it "upper house" as in the other case, I s'pose. —Nightstallion 01:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yup. But you misunderstood - should I move them all to the "Chamber of Counties" bit? --PaxEquilibrium 00:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Having read the Vojvodina election articles, it sounds similar to constituency voting for the National Assembly of France, in which case they should be included, no doubt. Number 57 00:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Local elections were organized in each county. Every county gave a specific amount of deputies. When all elections are over and deputies nominated, the Parliament is constructed. That's how's the Vojvodinian parliamentary election today. That's how most elections were back then. There weren't nation-wide like today. And if you ask me, they should've stayed that way. --PaxEquilibrium 00:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Imperial and Yugoslav elections
Should I add elections for Deputies in the Imperial Parliament that were in Croatia-Slavonia and(if) Dalmatia? --PaxEquilibrium 23:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
And how about in Yugoslavia? --PaxEquilibrium 00:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose so. —Nightstallion 01:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Do you mean representatives to the Austro-Hungarian/Yugoslavian parliaments, or to the local assembly? I would only include the latter (like on Template:Czech elections where only elections to the Czech local assembly during the Czechoslovakian era are included). Number 57 10:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- The first of course - the latter is that which already is in the article. --PaxEquilibrium 19:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Then no, I wouldn't include them - they should be part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire elections articles, if such things exist. I assume neither Austria or Hungary are successor states to the Empire, and therefore it should be treated like Czechoslovakia? Number 57 20:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, precisely. —Nightstallion 10:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Then no, I wouldn't include them - they should be part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire elections articles, if such things exist. I assume neither Austria or Hungary are successor states to the Empire, and therefore it should be treated like Czechoslovakia? Number 57 20:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Unknown elections
There seems to have been some sort of an election in 1885, but I can't confirm anything. --PaxEquilibrium 23:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
- What does the "(Military Frontier)" link signify? —Nightstallion 01:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- In late 1881 the Military Frontier was abolished and a huge chunk of its territory annexed to the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. In 1883 the Croatian Parliament was enlarged and elections were held in areas of the former Croatian and Slavonian Frontiers' municipalities to fill in the empty seats. It was a result of the crownland's expansion. --PaxEquilibrium 01:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Then it should be "Military Frontier parliamentary election"... —Nightstallion 13:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Why? --PaxEquilibrium 19:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Because it's more sensible, and we never have "()" in election article titles -- we have "region type election, year". —Nightstallion 20:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well don't you think that makes the picture like the Military Frontier had a parliament? --PaxEquilibrium 14:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Then we should call it "Croatian parliamentary by-election" instead. —Nightstallion 16:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- This is new to me. Is that some sort of standard practice? --PaxEquilibrium 21:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well, no, but this wasn't a standard case, either, was it? Simply having "Croatian parliamentary election" would indicate it was a *full* election, and having (Military Frontier) in parentheses afterwards is rather ugly and something we haven't done before at all... —Nightstallion 10:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- This is new to me. Is that some sort of standard practice? --PaxEquilibrium 21:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Then we should call it "Croatian parliamentary by-election" instead. —Nightstallion 16:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well don't you think that makes the picture like the Military Frontier had a parliament? --PaxEquilibrium 14:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Because it's more sensible, and we never have "()" in election article titles -- we have "region type election, year". —Nightstallion 20:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Why? --PaxEquilibrium 19:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- Then it should be "Military Frontier parliamentary election"... —Nightstallion 13:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
- In late 1881 the Military Frontier was abolished and a huge chunk of its territory annexed to the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. In 1883 the Croatian Parliament was enlarged and elections were held in areas of the former Croatian and Slavonian Frontiers' municipalities to fill in the empty seats. It was a result of the crownland's expansion. --PaxEquilibrium 01:44, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Problem
The current format of the template isn't adequate. Some Dalmatian elections (three or four) occurred during the same years as elections in Croatia-Slavonia (I have all the Dalmatian election results, which I'll add shortly). I'll try a quick fix for now. --Thewanderer 17:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- If they were for a separate Dalmatian parliament, I suggest we create a new template for them. пﮟოьεԻ 57 17:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Dalmatia was not a sovereign nation, but a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire which, along with Croatia-Slavonia formed the modern Croatian state. I don't see why it would have its own template. --Thewanderer 17:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Croatia-Slavonia wasn't a sovereign state either. Modern Croatia traces its foundation (in the preamble of its Constitution), to the Triune Kingdom, which includes Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia. --Thewanderer 17:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
I'd say we do it like this:
- Croatia-Slavonia: <electionlist>
- Dalmatia: <electionlist>
- (no qualifier) <electionlist Croatian elections>
All in the same -- i.e. this -- template. Okay? —Nightstallion 20:34, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm. I'm concerned that it would end up looking like this, which I do not find very aesthetically pleasing. Perhaps there could be either a new template for Croatia-Slavonia elections (if the current Croatia is not entirely a successor state of it, this would fit), or a new template for "Austro-Hungarian era elections in Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia" could be created. Any of these could be listed in the Past elections section of Elections in Croatia. пﮟოьεԻ 57 09:36, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- I actually think the version you linked to IS very good... —Nightstallion 10:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. Well, Croatia is not quite a successor of Croatia-Slavonia - but neither is any ex Yugoslavian country successor of... anything. They were all created in 1945 with combined choices and no particular one until the borders were finally permanently set in the 1950s. --PaxEquilibrium 11:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough, if every else likes it, feel free to put it back like that. I am just concerned about how it comes across when one of those series breaks across two lines (try reducing screen size to 800x600 and look). пﮟოьεԻ 57 15:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- I guess I'll be restoring the template then, as we seem to have a consensus. --Thewanderer 23:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough, if every else likes it, feel free to put it back like that. I am just concerned about how it comes across when one of those series breaks across two lines (try reducing screen size to 800x600 and look). пﮟოьεԻ 57 15:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. Well, Croatia is not quite a successor of Croatia-Slavonia - but neither is any ex Yugoslavian country successor of... anything. They were all created in 1945 with combined choices and no particular one until the borders were finally permanently set in the 1950s. --PaxEquilibrium 11:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
- I actually think the version you linked to IS very good... —Nightstallion 10:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
