This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Elections and Referendums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

Template:Annual readership

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 7 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III.

@Lord Stephenson: So what is there to discuss about implementing more recent pictures, if those pictures have the same quality? Time of Use of those older pictures is IMO not an argument to use older pictures even further. PS: I have updated the introducing-pictures of those two politicians in their wiki-biografies aswell. ----LennBr (talk) 21:18, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, both images are the lead images in the pages of Armin Laschet and Olaf Scholz. Secondly, both images are long-standing and there is no immediate need of revision but the fact that they are older than the images you suggested. However, they are only older by a year compared to the images you suggested and of a good quality, so in my opinion, WP:BROKE can be applied here. Thirdly, although the current images may not necessarily be of a better quality than the images you suggested, they are better-looking and more fitting. In the photograph of Armin Laschet that you suggested, Laschet's face is partly obscured due to the unfortunate angle in which the photograph was taken. In the current photograph of Laschet, that is not the case. The photograph of Olaf Scholz that you suggested is not an official photograph, unlike the current photograph. Scholz is also not looking at the camera, unlike in the current photograph. Fourthly, although the images you suggested have been taken more recently than the current images,Armin Laschet and Olaf Scholz have not visibly changed, which in my opinion leads to the issue of which photograph has been taken more recently irrelevant. I do therefore propose that the images of Armin Laschet be retained as they are now. ----Lord Stephenson (talk) 21:40, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lord Stephenson: Well a lot of wanna-be arguments from you. For the the first two: the fact that a picture is in use is no pro/nor a con argument...its irrelevant, as pictures can be changed by an instant. Also, for living persons the norm is, that pictures of them gets updated eventually. The third "argument" (about good looking) is not more than just a opinion. I for example - and from what I can see from the article history - several other user - wanted to change those pictures. I guess we all wanted to change it, because - at least in Armins case - he doesnt look really beneficial on the photo, that you try to keep in use. Introduction-pictures of politicians are (or at least should be) respresentative at best (for possible state leaders this applies even more). Unfortunately all four pictures are not more than just "snap-shots", with better quality. And if not looking at the camera were an actual argument, you would take that seriously and would not paste a picture, where Armin Laschet doesnt look straight into camera aswell. Now, as I have set this straight, I propose to implement this picture of Armin (both on this election article and on his wiki-biography) and implement the more recent picture of olaf in this and his article, too (as it is not as blurry as the one year older one...that the newer one is not an official one is irrelevant/has no effect). ----LennBr (talk) 22:27, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lord Stephenson: The more recent photo of Scholz, that I try to implement has a better quality (higher resolution), too. The fact that on the picture he is not looking straight into camera doesnt alter the pictures suitability. It is the same with the photo of Anna Lena Bearbock, where she doesnt look straight aswell, but there you dont care about that at all. because you dont make a point here and you know that. so stop it. I will continue reverting if you continue ignoring. ----LennBr (talk) 06:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lord Stephenson: you have been again reverted by a different user (this time by a registered one) regarding your effort to prevent a picture update at the olaf scholz article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olaf_Scholz&type=revision&diff=1046744557&oldid=1046743743&diffmode=source. You then reverted it. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olaf_Scholz&type=revision&diff=1046745276&oldid=1046744557&diffmode=source. After that an IP reverted you again, you then again told them, there is no consensus. You are not entitled to ignore a majority opinion and simultaneously tell them, that there is no consensus. What kind of a grown up are you? --LennBr (talk) 14:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to most projections[2] the SSW looks to win a seat. In case this does happen, should they or should they not be included in the infobox? Gust Justice (talk) 16:25, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, when it is confirmed. See 2021 Norwegian parliamentary election, the party "Patient Focus" is in the box because they have a seat, while a fair half dozen of parties got more votes without getting a seat. Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The SSW should not be included. In fact, I had added them sometime in June. But now, I think that it doesn't really make sense including a minority party that has no influence on the balance of power and likely less than 1 % of the vote in the electionbox. KamikazeMatrix26Juni (talk) 19:56, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This would be my view as well. Also is the policy followed in 2019 UK election. Gust Justice (talk) 22:00, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The version as I proposed it is in use in the 2019 Canadian federal election page, in fact, it is an exact copy for the exact same situation. Putting the information that the leader won the seat, but is not the incumbent, is not as important as that the leader lost the seat and hence, it makes sense to include it in a refnote. If the leader lost his/her seat, spelling it out in italics right around the seat is more appropriate because in most cases, it is more dramatic and otherwise it would contradict the category of "leaders seat" - that seat would not be the leaders seat, but someone others. KamikazeMatrix26Juni (talk) 22:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone post the preliminary results (make a subsection at the end of the article)? Both for the general and the regional elections that took place. --79.140.150.206 (talk) 22:47, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's no deadline (see WP:NODEADLINE); so that should absolutely wait until we at least have the complete preliminary results (there's still about 25 seats for which these are not available - notably the whole of Berlin (link here)). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do think we could make the link to the results website more visible. Otherwise I agree. Gust Justice (talk) 00:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The official website is here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:17, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Now release that the preliminary results will be given at 5:45 German time (half hour from now) - [3]; so that should solve the issue. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RandomCanadian:The seat distribution of the 20th Bundestag based on the result of this election has just been posted on the official website, so I have updated the infobox accordingly. RyanW1995 (talk) 04:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The two blue colours of the CSU and AfD are very similar and they are placed next to each other in the graphic showing the make up of the 735 seats. May I suggest either modifying the two blue colours slightly to make them more distinct, or else moving the CSU to the other side of the CDU, or even showing the CSU/CDU as one block, not next to the other, but with one above the other (ie, inner rings and outer rings). Nick Barnett (talk) 07:25, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Barnett:I have uploaded a better picture, using the same colors as the 2017 election diagram. Cheers. RyanW1995 (talk) 12:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]