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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Croatia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Croatia 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.CroatiaWikipedia:WikiProject CroatiaTemplate:WikiProject CroatiaCroatia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union 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.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Do we really need all this? The vast majority of those people are not notable, and this election didn't really contribute to elevating their notability. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:50, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm torn. It does seem rather excessive, but then again, I don't see the problem of it being there. However, I do think the list of parties is now superfluous as all parties are listed in the results table. Number57 09:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The candidates themselves are relatively minor compared to the party list names - their electoral threshold is 10%, and indeed nobody met it on the three winning lists. If a secondary source is cited, with a discussion of individual candidates, those should be mentioned, but not the entire kit and caboodle, that's best left for some izbori.hr data warehouse. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 11:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the "Candidates per list" section should be removed. It is not so important for the article and it occupies a large portion of the page. The "Results" section is almost invisible in comparison to it, and I still think results are more important than a bunch of anonymous candidates. What do you think? --Emir234 (talk) 18:15, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I removed all the losing candidates (keeping the losing party lists). --Joy [shallot] (talk) 21:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
