Talk:January 2005 Iraqi parliamentary election

message: I have read an allegation that some US idiot claimed many happy American supporting Iraqis voted in Fallujah. Dubious at best, and results so far seem to show that as false as anyone might guess. But, is it true that some US politician claimed that? If so, anyone know who?
:I have not heard any such claim.  That said there are so many politicians out there that I'm sure at least one said something like that.  If someone major said something like that, the media would have probably tore them to shreds.  --Bletch 19:21, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anbar 

message: I think that alot of people here might be missing out on a mathematical truth about Proportional Representation. While the Al-Sistani's United List may have only captured 47% of votes, they may well get more then 47% of the seats. Here's an example:
Lets say there's an election. Party Blue takes 550 votes. Party Red takes 300. Party Green takes 150. Party Purple takes 50. Party Orange also takes 50. And Party Brown takes 50 votes as well.
If you add this up, you'll see that Party Blue has less then half of the votes cast. The issue becomes one of Threshold. If the Threshold is set at 100, then all votes for parties that captured less then 100 votes need to be thrown out. If you do that, all of a sudden you realize that of those ballots, Party Blue does have a majority. My calculations has the List at 51.06% of the votes that will be used for the calculations, and thereofre capturing 141 of the 275 seats for a majority.
Perhaps I'm wrong? Pellaken 19:00, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A bunch of news sources are saying the UAI gets only 132 seats .  Are they incorrectly doing a straight 275 times 48%, or do they know something we do not. - SimonP 00:53, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
It depends really on one thing - are these from countries with PR? One of them looks like it may be. Pellaken 01:40, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minority or Majority? 

message: It is my understanding from reports on National Public Radio in the U.S. that voters in Iraqi Kurdistan voted on a ballot question on Iraqi Kurdistan's independence from the rest of Iraq.  It is also my understanding that this was a non-binding referendum.  Have there been any results announced of this referendum?  If so, could these be posted in the article?  Thanks in advance. - Scooter 03:24, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Independence of Iraqi Kurdistan 

message: The total vote cited by the IECI is 8.4 million. This is said to represent a 58% turnout. This must mean that there are 14.5 million registered voters. If Iraq's population is 25 million as Wikpedia says, then 58% of the population are registered voters. But since we are also told that half the population of Iraq is under 19, and since we must assume that a majority of Sunni Arabs have not registered as voters, something here does not add up. Iraq only has 12-13 million adults, so it can't have 14.5 million registered voters. Has anyone seen a figure for this? Adam 04:51, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Registration and turnout issue

message: Where are these figures on the number of seats won by each party coming from? There are no official figures on this. Adam 21:55, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Results table

message: How many women were elected to the National Assembly?  Women were given every third slot of the candidate lists and were estimated to get about 30% of the seats.  (Alphaboi867 18:49, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women 

message: Does anybody have information on the outcome of the election to the 111-member Kurdistan regional assembly? I mean, I expect the Democratic and Patriotic Alliance of Kurdistan to sweep, but does anybody have figures for it? None of the media I've seen even seem to be acknowledging that the regional elections happened. QuartierLatin1968 20:50, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kurdistan election results 

message: would this work.
Since the Sistani List won a majority, but likely having a minority would be politically more reasonable, could they make an offer to allow smaller parties to have more representation? Basacally, they would allow all the parties that are over the threshold to have as many seats as they truly deserve, this means the sistani list only gets 133 seats. in return, the following parties would get 1 representive:
Iraq Assembly of National Unity =
Assembly of Independent Democrats = 
Iraqi Islamic Party =
Islamic Dawa Movement = 
Iraqi National Gathering = 
Iraqi Republican Assembly = 
Constitutional Monarchy - Al-Sharif Ali bin Al-Hussein = 
Assembly for Iraqi Democracy = 
Independent - Ali Muslim Jar Allah Ali Al-Bithani = 
Hashemite Iraqi Monarchist Assembly = 
Democratic National Alliance = 
Democratic Iraqi Current = 
Democratic Iraq Assembly = 
Islamic Vanguard Party = 
National Front of the Unity of Iraq
My question to you guys is - is this possible? or does the election law forbid it? Pellaken 00:54, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get it. You said no country would retroactively change the election outcome. I gave two obvious counterexamples (so obvious that I wasn't sure you were serious). Now, I gather you are amending your assertion to "no country would retroactively change an election unless they called it corrupt" ? And further, you are saying that the Iraqi election was not corrupt, so therefore no country would change it? This is getting to be a much more complicated assertion, so I'll just make one point and leave this entirely alone -- I believe one of the criticisms of the Iraqi election is specifically that it is corrupted by being held under the auspices of a violent, repressive, puppet regime -- I assume you've seen such criticisms, as I hardly invented them; I'm only telling you what I see widely reported, not whether to believe it.
That you don't get it is perfectly evident. Adam 23:35, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  possible suggestion for iraq? 

message: This is an article about the elections, not about post-election political developments. They belong in Politics of Iraq. Adam 06:47, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, so would statements like "al-Qaida is opposed to all democratic election" also fall outside the scope of this article which is specific to a single election? zen master    T  18:19, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: Your position is illogical and inconsistent.  If you include a quotation about something larger than the election then it's fair game to include criticism of that.  The election critics are saying there are explanations other than terrorists are against freedom and democracy which stem from our historic policies in the middle east, how is that not relevant to the article?  It's all related.  Do you really believe terrorists hate freedom?  We should include paragraph synopsis sections that link to the other articles on iraq regardless, what do you think?  zen master    T  04:20, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: Sigh lets all try to be civil.  Zen - I'm all in favor of including info from election critics, provided that they directly pertain to the election.  Even if these quotes boil down to things like "Critics of the American and British presence in Iraq criticize the election as a consequence of that presence. See Xyz"  What is not appropriate is to go in long dissertations that have already been covered elsewhere.  On another note, I see nothing in this article that purpotes that "Terrorists hate freedom and democracy."  If you disagree with that analysis, then please propose an alternative wording. I see a quote from one individual named Zarqawi that says words to that effect, but nothing in this article claims that everybody that dislikes the USA makes that claim. --Bletch 14:06, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

text: Better than being a lackey, Adam, although of course I'd never call you that. —Christiaan 08:57, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Post election developments

message: We need to introduce this into the article somehow. http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/2295/ contains:
U.S. authorities in Iraq had manipulated the results in order to reduce the percentage of the vote received by the United Iraqi Alliance from 56% to 48%.
Asked by UFPPC's Ted Nation about this shocker, Ritter said an official involved in the manipulation was the source, and that this would soon be reported by a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist in a major metropolitan magazine -- an obvious allusion to New Yorker reporter Seymour M. Hersh.
—Christiaan 23:52, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ritter's agenda is well known. We will need to see his evidence. Given that "US authorities" did not actually conduct the election - it was conducted almost entirely by Iraqis - the evidence will need to be good. Adam 23:54, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, considering who we are talking about and the severity of the allegations I think this should be included in the article on its own merit. However I'm not going to bother pushing this for the moment as this article is being guarded by yourself, SimonP and the like to ensure nothing critical creeps in. —Christiaan 00:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Touching on the evidence used by Ritter is, of course, important, but I see no need for it to be particularly compelling to be included. El_C 00:36, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: I've went ahead and added a small blurb.  If evidence is eventually provided, then that section can be built up upon.  There is nothing to lose by including this info.  --Bletch 02:32, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: If you'll notice I haven't mentioned Bush once in my messages, I blame his neo-con advisors rather than him.  I want real democracy for the 25 million Iraqis, I don't see how true freedom is possible with the Pentagon and neo-cons orchestrating the situation. zen master    T  15:51, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't respond directly to his arguments and accusations Zen, instead frame the argument from your point of view. You might notice he doesn't respond to yours; he reframes them instead. —Christiaan 20:14, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scott Ritter says U.S. manipulated vote 

message: Carbonite, you just removed a line I added to the intro with the edit summary "rm sentence from introduction on Bush and Blair; this should be discussed later in the article". Fine, let's deal with this issue further down in the text, so how about moving the sentence rather than deleting it? -- Viajero 14:28, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure that the sentence in question belongs in the article at all. However, a sentence conveying similar information may be useful later in the text. That's why I removed the line instead of moving it. On a side note, the link that you included with the sentence in question probably shouldn't be used. A more recent and better sourced link would be much more helpful to a reader. Carbonite | Talk 15:06, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election as validation of Bush/Blair policies 

message: With the approval of the constitution, new elections for a permanent government will happen by December 15, 2005. Thus, this article's title will have to change to Iraqi legislative election, January 2005 or some such.  Should I just make the move or do we need to build consensus first? --Jfruh 20:27, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The need for this change is a pretty obvious, so feel free to go ahead. Remember to correct any double redirects creted by the move. - SimonP 20:30, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Made the move ... will hunt down double redirects later tonight, less'n someone else wants to tackle it.  --Jfruh 20:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article's name will need to change... 

message: Please contibute to this discussion about renaming this article Iraqi parliamentary election, January 2005. AndrewRT(Talk) 23:08, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename "parliamentary" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Iraqi parliamentary election, January 2005. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080513140854/http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0609-02.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0609-02.htm
*Added  tag to http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2005/01/28/913415-cp.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051023012011/http://www.imie.ca/rep_Jan30.html to http://www.imie.ca/rep_Jan30.html
*Added  tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1107487146382
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051023012355/http://www.imie.ca/rep_OCV.html to http://www.imie.ca/rep_OCV.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051025173548/http://www.angus-reid.com/tracker/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=5143 to http://www.angus-reid.com/tracker/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=5143
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Iraqi parliamentary election, January 2005. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050206100202/http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=%2Fap%2F20050201%2Fap_on_re_mi_ea%2Firaq_050201130760 to http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=%2Fap%2F20050201%2Fap_on_re_mi_ea%2Firaq_050201130760
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050207025715/http://democracywatch.org/countries/iz.html to http://democracywatch.org/countries/iz.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified