Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/EbeBot

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

 Not done @Ebe123: This request seems to be abandoned, please reopen it if that is not the case. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:33, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EbeBot[edit]

EbeBot (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Operator: Ebe123 (talk • contribs • logs)

Task/s
Code
Function details

Takes election data from Elections Canada and the Library of Parliament that I process in Excel to create new items or add candidacy in election (P3602) statements. Could the flooder flag be provided for the 3rd point? Ebe123 (talk | contributions) 20:39, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think P4100 should be used for the list a candidate is included on. Parliamentary groups would be the ones that are formed once a candidates is actually elected. Most of the time, this would be the list one, but it needn't be. Neither is the parliamentary group necessarily identical to the political party. --- Jura 04:10, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand your point about lists nor about parliamentary groups, but most candidates run as a member of a party (parliamentary group), and which party they run as. How they run is what is recorded, and is identical to political party... Ebe123 (talk | contributions) 12:29, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Most, but you are amalgamating three different things. Is the Canadian term for "parliamentary group" "caucus"? --- Jura 13:00, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. Ebe123 (talk | contributions) 13:15, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    News about the Trudeau/Wilson-Raybould/Philpott story are sometimes a bit sketchy, but isn't the expulsion from the caucus, not the party? --- Jura 14:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    They ran as liberals, which would be the value used for P4100, but they can't run as Liberals next election. Ebe123 (talk | contributions) 20:46, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jura1:, are you satisfied with the answers?--Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I still think the planned property use is incorrectly combining different aspects. To me, it seems clear from the Canadian sample. In countries where there are more than 2 or 3 parties, parliamentary groups generally combine several parties, but members still get elected on a list for a specific party. --- Jura 07:14, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    You're talking about coalitions, which are formed after the election, and uses political coalition (P5832). What property do you think better represents the party for which a candidate/nominee runs with? Ebe123 (talk | contributions) 13:45, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -SixTwoEight (talk) 00:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Rhadamante‎, Serpicozaure: who seem to be working on parliamentary groups. --- Jura 08:25, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with Jura, P4100 is not the thing to use here. Parliamentary groups, parties, coalitions, electoral lists re differnts thungs. Even for countries with Westminster system.
    • Parliamentary groups are exclusively for elected people sitting together in a parliamentary assembly. Most of the time they are from the same party, but sometimes not, one can have been elected as an independent, or from a party allied that has not the minimum required number of elected people to form its own group (for the case, I think what's going in he local parliament in Québec illustrates the concept pretty well)
    • Coalition can have different ways. It can be an electoral coalition of parties making a common electoral list together, while still being separate; eg in Spain, that was the case for Unidos Podemos (Q24039754), in Greece for SYRIZA (Q222897) (before transforming themselves into a party); in France, for the upcoming European election, there is even a coalition Socialist Party (Q170972)/Place publique (Q58366009)/New Deal (Q15629523) saying that their future deputies will decide individually in which parliamentary group they will sit... It can also be an alliance afterwards, political parties elected separately, sometimes with the clear goal to govern together in the end (that was at some point the case with the libdem/Cons in the UK or CDU/FDP in Germany in the noughties), sometimes not (for instance the current coalition Conservative Party (Q9626)/Conservative Party (Q9626) in the UK, or Five Star Movement (Q47817)/Lega Nord (Q47750) in Italy, not to mention Greece, Spain, Portugal, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium...)
    But back to he subject, no, P4100 cannot be used for electoral list. Either use the parties, colitions, custom items, or even nothing, but not P4100. Rhadamante (talk) 20:24, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Je ne comprends pas trop votre point ; voici un exemple de comment j'utilise(rais) la propriété : (Justin Trudeau (Q3099714))
candidacy in election
Normal rank 2015 Canadian federal election edit
votes received 26,391
electoral district Papineau
parliamentary group Liberal Party of Canada
0 references
add reference


add value

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Bot/EbeBot&oldid=1235953678"