Talk:1792 French National Convention election

Comments

These participatory data seem highly improbably in the light of general suffrage of 1848 (60 years later) having only 9,5 m people owning a right to vote (males older than 21 years old). More details would be appreciated on the circle of people having a right to vote in 1792 (e.g. females, age etc.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.6.177.253 (talk) 11:12, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Moreover, the article states that "turnout was only 10%". Either that or the popular vote totals (which add up to 20 million votes cast) must be wrong. 68.56.141.153 (talk) 22:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Election period

The Crook source is clear that the elections began in August, so the repeated changes to just September in the introduction are wrong. The main relevant bit is on page 95 where it makes it clear primary elections took place in August. Cheers, Number 57 19:53, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you do the same in the US, pre-elections are part to the elections and shouldn't be seperated?Taksen (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm not American, but what is being referred to here are not "primary elections" in the American sense (i.e. to select party's candidates). They were elections to elect members of the electoral colleges. I've removed the link to primary election to avoid any confusion. Number 57 20:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Why was the infobox removed for most of the french legislative elections before the 1940s

I understand that some information can be inaccurate but I don't understand the results have to be removed entirely for the majority french elections before world war 2. I know this isn't about this article necessarily but I dont know anywhere else to make this? Let me know where to go if this isn't the right place KatieCamp (talk) 21:59, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Because in the vast majority of cases, the results previously in the articles appeared to have been made up and did not match the sources available. In many cases (like this election), the results are completely unclear (as there were no formal parties), so it has not been possible to create a results table, and in turn, to have any kind of result details in the infobox.

There are some others (like 1827) where there are a set of results, but a lack of sources detailing the leaders. I would have no problem adding the parties/seats to the 1827 infobox, but no leader details etc. Cheers, Number 57 10:21, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Made-up vote totals and estimated seat figures

For future reference, the vote totals that were previously in this article are made up. Someone has taken the estimated number of votes cast (3,360,000) and divided it by the estimated number of seats won by each group. For example, the Maraisards supposed received 1,747,200 votes – this is backcalculated from them winning 389 of 749 seats (389/749 = 52%, 52% of 3,360,000 is 1,747,200).

As for the seat totals, they are rough estimates as there was no clear delineation of parties in this era. As this source says, they should not be considered hard facts, and IMO, should not be in infobox, where they are presented as hard facts without such context. Cheers, Number 57 17:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Infobox Seat Count Idea

What if instead of taking out the seat counts or having incorrect information we use a ~, for example in the infobox the Marais Party would have ~389. I think that this would solve the problem. (If you don't know, ~ means roughly/about.) History6042 (talk) 19:44, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Using the ~ would not make the incorrect information correct or acceptable. There are no meaningful seat figures – I think people just need to accept that infoboxes cannot be filled in for elections like this. Number 57 21:06, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

I understand that, but if the use of an infobox is to summarize the text, and the text says, "Although it is often stated that the Marais won around 389 seats, the leftist Montagnards led by Maximilien Robespierre won around 200 seats and the more moderate Girondin faction led by Jacques Pierre Brissot around 160 seats, there was no clear delineation of political affiliation and seat totals cannot be considered to be hard facts," then isn't that part of the text? Therefore, if that is the rough amount than we are not putting falsified information on the page and still summarizing the text? Also, another page uses this approach, May 1815 French legislative election. History6042 (talk) 21:19, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

(a) This is not the same as the 1815 case – in 1815 there are real but approximate numbers. The issue here is that are no real numbers – some sources have claimed there are, but others have clarified that they are not real numbers. Perhaps the issue is that there is a misunderstanding over the status of the numbers – the 389/200/160 figures are not 'rough' numbers, they are not real.

(b) Following on from this, the reason why the text references the supposed seat numbers is to explain to readers that while they may have read elsewhere that there were seat figures available, they are not real ones. It would be highly misleading to include any seat figures in the infobox – the only thing that would be appropriate to include (if people insisted there had to be something there) would be some text that simply says "There are no reliable seat numbers for this election". Number 57 22:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Oh okay. History6042 (talk) 23:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)