Talk:1972 United States presidential election

message: LordStephenson wanted to "make the picture fit with the pattern" that was in other elections.
It seems a little dumb-ish. I think it should be changed.
xdude (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  New picture for Nixon 

message: Can we change McGovern's picture back? In the new one his face is covered in shadows and you can't see his eyes, so I don't think it looks great. Aimasterclmaster (talk) 02:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  McGovern Picture 

message: Please vote on the portrait used in the article. I believe that Photo 1, the current one, is better because, even though it is a Black and White (B&W) image, it gives off a better view of Senator McGovern and allow us, the viewers and editors of Wikipedia, to see what he had looked like during his Presidential Election at the time of the 1972 Election. I vote for Photo 1.
GeorgeStanleyMcGovern.jpg|Photo 1
File:McGovern campaign portrait (cropped) (3x4).jpg|Photo 2
 HistorianL (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote for Photo 2. While the shadows may somewhat mildly obscure how he looks, it's best that both images are color or B/W. The color image tends to be preferred by the community here, though the original article had a vote ruling in favor of the B/W option. I also think that the B/W one crops too close, and the color one also seems to be slightly higher resolution. I'd also, though note that this is my own personal belief, not official, like to state that I think it's best to have more image diversity throughout Wikipedia. ~ Mycranthebigman of Alaska ^_^ 05:44, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

text: Photo 2. having both candidates a color portrait adds a sense of consistency to the wikibox Festive TCT (talk) 19:10, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

text: I’m voting for Photo 2 Gelid Lagopus (talk) 05:55, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

text: Photo 2 is the best. It's a color image, so it inherently better represents how the Senator looked at the time. Plus, he's actually posing for the camera in it, so it makes for a much closer match to Nixon's current portrait on the infobox. --GI Brown 1970 (talk) 06:15, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portait Vote 

message: A while back, I edited the infobox to remove the parentheses talking about Eagleton and instead made that a footnote next to Shriver's name. Could someone explain why it was deleted and the parentheses were put back? I thought footnotes were the standard for additional information in infoboxes. And honestly, the parentheses are just kind of ugly and distracting in there. Pickle Mon (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eagleton Footnote 

message: I've moved the following addition, made in good faith, here for discussion, because it needs so many qualifications that its value might be lost:
As of the 2020 Presidential Election, Nixon remains the only candidate to have won a statewide election in every state since the adoption of the 12th Amendment, with Nixon having won Massachusetts as part of the Eisenhower ticket in 1952 and 1956
Some of the qualifications are included above (if sometimes obscurely), but adding other necessary qualifications or explanations might make this too fussy for the average reader:
# "since ... the 12th Amendment", without giving its date (June 1804) doesn't help; before 1804, both Washington and John Adams had managed to carry every state then in the Union;
# In any case, James Madison (and, I think, Daniel Tompkins) carried every state in 1820, well after the 12th Amendment's adoption;
# If the criterion is winning the popular vote in a statewide election, that was not possible before 1868, since South Carolina's legislature picked the Palmetto State's electors before then;
# While technically true for states, it does not hold for the District of Columbia, which had no electoral vote in 1952, 1956 & 1960 (before the 23rd Amendment) but voted against Nixon in both of his elections where its electoral vote counted: 1968 & 1972.
—— Shakescene (talk) 13:53, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is a fair criticism as to whether or not to include the anecdote. It is perhaps too overly qualified. Rtucci (talk) 19:05, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Nixon's carrying of every state too heavily qualified to be useful? 

message: The map image for the democratic primary has multiple states colored pink, but there is no indication in the key of who this represents. George Wallace's wikipedia page shows a map that indicates he won Florida, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina and Tennessee, and those are pink states on this map, but Mississippi is also a pink state and Wallace's wikipedia page does not list him as winning Alabama. There is this https://centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/the-modern-history-of-the-democratic-presidential-primary-1972-2008/ page from the Center for Politics showing that Wallace won Alabama, Florida, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, Tennessee, which would seem to conflict with both this page and George Wallace's Page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:4CE0:C800:F5EA:263C:3995:C43A (talk) 02:49, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Democratic Primary Map Issues