Talk:The Game of Votes

This page was proposed for deletion by Cabayi (talk · contribs) on 15 October 2019.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

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 articles

Rename Page[edit]

Can we rename this page to "The Game of Votes"? Someone please Help me. Virenderthind2019 (talk) 17:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

It doesn't look to me like the citations in this article are being at all properly used. Instead, at least the bulk of them just amount to different places this book is advertised. - Jmabel | Talk 02:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir, I could not understand. References are not enough? Virenderthind2019 (talk) 02:18, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest my fellow experienced editors i) take a look at [1] an ii) start assisting the new editor who created the article rather than hassling him. I'm sure my first 113 edits weren't covered in glory; and neither were theirs. "Transcendant irony", indeed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Andy, I have higher priorities than this article: happened to be pulled here to look at it (over the photo, if I remember right), saw something not quite right. In particular: bringing in a different review, just to cite for the author's name, is not how citations are usually used. @Virenderthind2019: I suggest looking at a few similar articles to get a better sense of how citations are normally used. If you already have a reference for a fact, especially an uncontroversial fact, and you have nothing substantive to bring in from the new source, usually you don't bring in a new source. Nothing actively wrong with it, just a little weird to bring in a bunch of reviews as references & not pull anything of substance from some of those reviews. - Jmabel | Talk 01:06, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]