Talk:2018 Rwandan parliamentary election
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Result?
[edit]On the Rwandese Electoral Colmission website here, there is a document among the publications related to the election, named IBYAVUYE_MU_MATORA_Y_ABAGORE_-ABAFITE_UBUMUGA_-_URUBYIRUKO_-__2018.pdf. Its content look like election results to me, in numbers and percentages still lacking here. But it's not in french nor english, so I'm not so sure of it. Does anyone who can read itt could confirm?--Aréat (talk) 01:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Aréat: They seem to be the results for the indirectly-elected seats (24 women, two youth and one disabled). Number 57 08:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- It deem you're right. The number of won seats fits the constituencies. So the rwandese commission published the full result for tje infirect election but none of the direct one. How frustrating. --Aréat (talk) 18:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Unfortunately they don't seem to do so for parliamentary elections. I recall the 2013 ones weren't published in full either. Number 57 19:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- It deem you're right. The number of won seats fits the constituencies. So the rwandese commission published the full result for tje infirect election but none of the direct one. How frustrating. --Aréat (talk) 18:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
I have used this document released by NEC to calculate the voting percentages. See on page 25. In the first table there are the votes of the 5 lists/parties and in the second one there are the votes of the 4 independent candidates. Outlier can be noted, in particular for the too rounded percentages of PL and PSD, which normally indicate the fact that the number of votes could have been subsequently adjusted. The figure is even more improbable if we note that the percentage of the diaspora vote (Rwandans living abroad) is almost identical to the national one. I intend to publish the diaspora vote table in the next few days, leaving the reader the freedom to interpret the data.
- Thanks for that. There's one slight issue that the figures in the document (those in tables 16, 18, 19 and 20) are not consistent, but it's much better than having nothing. Pinging Aréat for info. Number 57 10:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
- Great to finally have results. Thanks for the data, and thanks for notifying me. --Aréat (talk) 10:44, 11 February 2019 (UTC)