Talk:2022 Indian presidential election

About the map included in the infobox

To cease the ongoing edit war, I suggest to remove the map on the page until an agreement has been reached (or at least a consensus with the help of a third opinion). I invite Viewmont Viking and Vandit245 to discuss their point of view below. --Kzkzb (talk) 15:25, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

The Jammu and Kashmir Instrument of Accession, 1947 mentions the accession of the whole of erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir to the Republic of India. Legally, this makes the two faded parts in the original map also a part of India and hence belong to India but are illegally occupied and administered by Pakistan and China, and this has been echoed by the Republic of India ever since October, 1947. The illegal nature of the administration/occupation should either-

1. OBVIATE the need to show these two areas as faded out because that occupation is illegal in the first place.

2. REQUIRE a specific reference to these faded out areas as being under illegal occupation/administration of Pakistan and China with clear reference to these areas as belonging rightfully to India. I request the use of the word 'belong' rather than the word 'claim' while making such a reference in the caption.

Either of these changes should be implemented in such a case.Vandit245 (talk) 18:30, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

@Vandit245: Thank you for taking the time to express your opinion here.

However, I think we should not comply with either of your requests, here's why:

You argue that we should dismiss Pakistan and China's claims of Indian territories because their occupation is illegal. However, this is inconsistent with the way Wikipedia deals with territorial disputes which are defined as a disagreement over the possession or control of land between two or more political entities; this definition still applies whether the land should "legally belong" to any country or not. The first option you suggest (OBVIATE the need to show these two areas as faded out because that occupation is illegal in the first place) would require us to take a stand in an ongoing territorial dispute by ignoring Pakistan and China's claims, which violates Wikipedia's policy that articles must be written from a neutral point of view; we must leave these areas as faded out to accurately represent the fact that these areas are disputed.

This falls in line with what we do for other territorial disputes:

• In Kosovo's case, whose declaration of independence has been declared legal by the International Court of Justice, but which is contested by Serbia as well as many other countries, we depict the part claimed by Kosovo differently: despite the legality of Kosovo's claim according to the International Court of Justice, the territory is still disputed, thus we should neither depict Kosovo as a fully independent country, nor show that the territory claimed by Kosovo belongs to Serbia.
• Regarding the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, which many countries consider a violation of international law, we depict Crimea separately from the rest of the territories claimed by both Russia and Ukraine (see the maps in the infoboxes of the respective countries), because once again, the fact that Crimea is considered under international law as belonging to Ukraine does not change the fact that Ukraine's claim to Crimean territory is disputed, thus we neither depict Crimea as belonging to Russia nor as belonging to Ukraine.

Your second request to state that these faded out areas [belong] rightfully to India within the article would violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, as it is not Wikipedia's job to say whether a territory "rightfully belongs" to any country; note that we don't state that the territory claimed by Kosovo "rightfully belongs to Kosovo" or that Crimea "rightfully belongs to Ukraine" regardless of international law.

You have the right to believe that these territories claimed by Pakistan and China "rightfully belong to India", but it is not Wikipedia's job to say such a thing, no matter how true that may be; we should rather let the reader decide whether it does or not, which is what the "fading out" of these areas does.

(TL;DR) It's not Wikipedia's job to tell what is right or what is true. Your request to depict the disputed territories of India as "rightfully belonging to India" violate that principle. Thus, we shouldn't comply with either of your requests. The argument that Pakistan's and China's territorial claims are illegal is irrelevant in this case. --Kzkzb (talk) 18:49, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I have a query. If tomorrow China claimed that the whole of India belongs to them, would you fade out the entire map of India? What is this policy specifically regarding 'fading out' maps to indicate claims/sovereignty/autonomy or whatever you call it. In the case of Taiwan, the map of Taiwan is not faded out, even though the whole of China officially claims that Taiwan's territory belongs to it. My whole point is about this notion of fading out/coloring/highlighting or altering maps in Wikipedia to indicate claims over a territory and to what extent does this policy fading out/coloring/highlighting or altering of actually apply. Vandit245 (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

There has to be some merits that have to be reasonably considered and points to be judged before Wikipedia starts showing parts/whole of a territory in a separate fashion to indicate a dispute/claim. If this is so, then the merit of the Jammu and Kashmir Accesstion of Instrument, 1949 trumps the claims that Pakistan and China have over the entirety of Kashmir.

But if your point is that nothing but the claim of a country over someone's territory is required/enough to rightfully allow/warrant fading out those parts in a map, then nothing of such sort has happened in the case of Taiwan or any other territorial disputes throughout the world, especially the ones in which China is involved in. The ROC claims the territory of PRC and PRC claims the territory of ROC and hence both of their maps should be shown as 'faded out' or highlighted different in a manner to show some sort of claims. Blanket claims by a country have not warranted fading out territories in Wikipedia.Vandit245 (talk) 17:23, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@Vandit245: In the case of Taiwan, the map of Taiwan is not faded out, even though the whole of China officially claims that Taiwan's territory belongs to it.

In this case, you couldn't really fade out Taiwan since the entirety of the territory of Taiwan is claimed by China, thus there wouldn't be any "non-faded out territory" to contrast with the "faded-out territory". However a map can also include information about which country occupies and administers a given territory.

As you noted in your first reply, some territory claimed by India has been occupied and administered by other countries, thus India does not control them; this is why in the original map, the territory that is administered by China or Pakistan is shown differently to the territory that is administered by India. Note that this also works the other way: if you look at the previous map, some bits of India that China or Pakistan claim are shown in a different color, indicating that the territory is actually controlled by India. See the legend of the map in Wikimedia Commons.

Regardless, I think that if you have an issue over the usage of this map in this page, you would probably have the same issue with other Wikipedia articles using this map. In that case, I invite you to seek consensus to change the map itself in Wikimedia Commons instead of replacing the map used in this article; the creator of the map will be in a better position to explain why they designed the map that way than I could.

PS: Please indent your replies to make the thread more readable: see Wikipedia:Indentation to learn how to do so. --Kzkzb (talk) 21:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

@Vandit245: As you haven't replied in the last two months, I put the original map back in the infobox. If you manage to get the image updated on Wikimedia Commons, that change will be reflected on the article. --Kzkzb (talk) 08:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Opposition as independent

@Vsa111 all candidates who contest in presidential election have to contest as independent candidates, as their is not any political party which gives tickets. That's why every candidate has to resign from any chair of any political party. That's why Jaswant decided to quit his chair in TMC but unofficially he is still in TMC until he joins a New party. Same goes for other candidates. As Draupadi Murmu served as governer, she officially doesn't belong to any party. Ku423winz1 (talk) 16:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

As written in previous presidential election's wiki page, Draupudi Murmu and Yashwant Sinha should be designated as BJP and TMC or AITMC leader respectively. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.142.67.60 (talk) 04:16, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Sources for the table

The table for party-wise votes doesn't have any sources. Especially for the non block "Non-NDA, Supporting NDA Candidate". While I have been able to find reliable sources for BJD, YSRCP, BSP and JCC, there are no sources for MNS or SAD. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 20:11, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Rsrikanth05 I am still wondering what is the source for the 2022_Indian_presidential_election#Party-wise_vote_(projection) section. It is entirely unsourced and should be removed if it is WP:Original Research Venkat TL (talk) 14:03, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Same here. I'm guessing it was added on the basis of who is part of the NDA/UPA. Best option is to add a new column for sources and find sources on which party pledges support to which candidate. -- Rsrikanth05 (talk) 15:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

@Rsrikanth05 good idea. The header says seat projections. So it is an opinion based on the party lines, with the assumption that the MLAs would vote on party lines, this is never the case and there are always cross voting. The final result shows that the Opposition got 3% less than expected. In my opinion this detailed distribution should have been done for the results section, and the projection section should have been summarized. So apart from your suggestion, an alt suggestion would be to greatly trim this table. Whatever be the preferred method but, something should be done soon as this sourcing issue is holding up the nomination on WP:ITNC Venkat TL (talk) 15:25, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I'll do what I can shortly. -- Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:52, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Shiv Sena & Electoral College

Shiv Sena came UPA to NDA. The counting of the electoral college votes needs to be restructured. Arabi Abrar (talk) 07:48, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Parties to be added to NDA parties. SDF party and LJP(RV) they have openly supported NDA nominee. Please check it

SDF Rajya sabha MP in its interview said they will vote for nda candidate and are part of nda from 2014.and Chirag paswan said he will vote for murmu ji as she she a dalit as his father fought for their upliftment so he will vote for her. And Rajnath singh called him... Ashutosh singh 761980 (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Vote projection

If anyone could just correct the % mentioned on "Total votes for BJP candidate" & "Total votes for AITC candidate". I corrected the % totals but idk how to change on these two places.

Total votes for BJP candidate should be changed from 61.46% to 61.48% And, Total votes for AITC candidate should be changed from 36.32% to 36.24%

Thanks FofS&E (talk) 04:50, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

New map for Electoral College

Hey, I've made a new and better map for the electoral college, please consider adding it,

file name is 2022_Presidential_Election_Map.png

link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2022_Indian_Presidential_Election_Map.png Indiannobody (talk) 17:02, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 July 2022

Line 32, change " Indiannobody (talk) 17:07, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Bears (talk) 17:13, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Line 32, change the "map_image" file from "Indian presidential election Indian map.jpg" to "2022_Indian_Presidential_Election_Map.png"

It's a better edited map of the Indian Electoral College, no source needed. Also we've the same surname, except I'm a Brahmin lmao. Have a good day. Indiannobody (talk) 17:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

 Already done Aaron Liu (talk) 14:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Undo

@Shreyas Krishna Prasad Please refer to Wikipedia article of Tripura Legislative Assembly. One seat is vacant, hence 59, not 60. FofS&E (talk) 10:35, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Incidents tab

@Venkat TL Do we really need an incidents tab for a mere allegation by political adversaries? Political parties are expected to make allegations when they lose or for one upmanship. I see that you have added a source too, but this allegation by INC was made in 19th July. If there was any merit in this allegation the EC wouldn't have given the certificate of election on 22nd July to the president elect. INC leaders who submitted this complaint to EC had demanded ECI to direct the returning officer to treat all votes polled in favour of NDA candidate as invalid, otherwise the election would not be free and fair, according to INC. But since there was no merit, the returning officer or ECI have gone ahead with the results :- https://mobile.twitter.com/timesofindia/status/1550388143802556416

I request you to delete Incidents tab, since it is common practice for political parties to conduct mock polling (done by YSRC party too) before actual polling. Moreover, it is also common for political parties to call their MLAs to stay in hotel or resort in several states, to prevent influencing by political adversaries. Since, the INC leaders have not shown any preliminary evidence also to support their allegation, the incidents tab is of no use.

Thanks. FofS&E (talk) 02:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

A formal complaint has been filed to ECI. So this makes the incident notable enough to be covered. See MOS:INDELECT. Venkat TL (talk) 06:15, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, The ECI has already granted the winning certificate to President elect Droupadi Murmu. Let us see, if the complaint has any value till her oath taking ceremony which is due soon. FofS&E (talk) 09:57, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Reduction of Election System

Hi @Modest Genius (talk) I think there is no need for election system article in this wiki page because I have never saw an election page where election system is described, even the previous Indian presidential elections, or Indian general election or even presidential election of other countries. Although the election system can be added in the template, in a single sentence, the parameter is there. Ku423winz1 (talk) 04:16, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

It's pretty standard on wiki election pages to mention the system used in the election. That's a basic information, considering how many different voting system there is in the world. It's the previous indian presidential election pages that lacked it, rather than this one having one too much, imo.--Aréat (talk) 06:41, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2022

As of 2022, the electoral college comprises 776 MPs and 4,033 MLAs (excluding 90 MLAs of the currently dissolved and recently delimited Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly). → As of 2022, the electoral college comprises 776 MPs and 4,033 MLAs (excluding the 90 MLAs of the currently dissolved and recently delimited Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly). The election commission assigns varying numbers of votes to these electoral college members, such that the total weight of MPs and those of MLAs is roughly equal and that the voting power of states and territories are proportional to their population. → The election commission assigns varying votes to these electoral college members, such that the total weight of MPs and those of MLAs is roughly equal and that the voting power of states and territories is proportional to their population. The manner of election of President is provided by Article 55 of the Constitution. → The manner of election of the President is provided by Article 55 of the Constitution. On 21 June 2022, Yashwant Sinha, a former AITC leader, was unanimously chosen as common candidate of UPA and other opposition parties for 2022 Presidential Election. → On 21 June 2022, Yashwant Sinha, a former AITC leader, was unanimously chosen as common candidate of UPA and other opposition parties for the 2022 Presidential Election. Congress filed complaint with the Election Commission against Droupadi Murmu and BJP leaders, alleging poll code violation in Karnataka. → Congress filed a complaint with the Election Commission against Droupadi Murmu and BJP leaders, alleging poll code violation in Karnataka. AgarwalYuvraj (talk) 15:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done. (@AgarwalYuvraj) lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 13:14, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Please change the map

@Indiannobody the territory of J&K was bifurcated into two UTs namely J&K and Ladakh. So therefore could you please update the map to reflect the changes.  Debjyoti Gorai  (talk) 12:41, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

I've uploaded an updated map, if you want to make the changes, you're welcome.

2022_Indian_Presidential_Election_Map_Updated.png Indiannobody (talk) 17:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Map Issue

Ladakh, and Jammu and Kashmir never voted in the Presidential Election, why are they coloured? It makes absolutely no sense. I see there's an issue about the grey coloured area, you can use this make, makes the most sense, thanks.

[1]https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2022_Indian_Presidential_Election_Map_Updated.png Kasperia01 (talk) 14:21, 9 October 2022 (UTC)