# Talk:2025 Liechtenstein general election

Unlike other countries the prime minister candidates in Liechtenstein aren't part of the parliamentary election. They are just announced pro forma but none of them is up for election in parliament and as Liechtenstein is a parliamentary democracy parliament will vote on the members of government after the election. In addition they aren't, like in most other parliamentary democracies, party leader. In the case of Brigitte Haas, there was no prior affiliation to the party.
If they should be kept, there is still one little mistake; Thomas Rehak is not a prime minister candidate but only party leader. In October the Democrats for Liechtenstein announced that it is unlikely, that there will be a candidate for government. [1] 178.197.203.175 (talk) 22:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Going by the previous elections, the prime minister candidate is considered the 'leader' in this case. You are correct in what you are saying, but I do believe it is done this way as it avoids confusion between the two, as the prime minister candidates are the ones actually relevant to the election, after all. For those that don't have a candidate, then the party leader is the next best thing. Someone correctly pointed out that the Free List no longer has any official leadership, so that has just been made blank. TheBritinator (talk) 17:30, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

The image labeled "2025 Liechtenstein General Election Map" lists the Democrats for Liechtenstein party as the "Democracts for Liechtenstein," with an extra "c" in the word "Democrats." 66.215.227.3 (talk) 09:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:2025 Liechtenstein general election/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TheBritinator (talk · contribs) 19:54, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Crispybeatle (talk · contribs) 21:53, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the review. TheBritinator (talk) 22:38, 11 July 2025 (UTC)


### GA Review
I haven't an article like this in a while, maybe because I copyedit. Anyway, the article is clear, well illustrated, has a great prose, and has neutral point of view, all in all it meets the criteria.
I quite like the illustrations and the fact they are SVG, the layout is compliant with MOS, WP:INTEXT is used correctly, the only spelling mistakes were some commas which edited in.
The lead is a bit odd, it needs some simple copyediting, for example: "Thomas Rehak and Erich Hasler as government candidates, being the first time the party has done so." First time what?, also the layout of the lead is a bit different from others but isn't wrong, I'm saying this if you want to change it.
The citations are fine, but 7 and 10 on the "Background" section was a bit confusing, but it still supported the text on the article.
I know nothing of Lichtenstein, but this article made this super clear on what happened on the election.
1. Well written?:

Prose quality: 
Manual of Style compliance: 
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources: 
Citations to reliable sources, where required: 
No original research: 
3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects: 
Focused: 
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias: 
5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA): 
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall: 

Pass or Fail: