Talk:D'Hondt method: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:40, 28 June 2022

Latest revision as of 21:17, 16 February 2025

(10 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|

Would you be kind wenough to explain how the 'overall fraction of residual votes' equation is derived or dormulated? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C6:6C06:801:6509:EF16:D5DB:7868|2A00:23C6:6C06:801:6509:EF16:D5DB:7868]] ([[User talk:2A00:23C6:6C06:801:6509:EF16:D5DB:7868#top|talk]]) 15:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

{{WikiProject Politics|class=start|importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject Elections and Referendums}}

}}

{{WikiProject Politics|class=start|importance=mid}}

__TOC__

==2004 Comments==

I don't understand how d'hondt system may be applied in open list system. In fact I believe this is not possible.

Line 12:

:I know for a fact that it is possible, because it is used in Finland. Each vote is give to <strong>a person</strong> who is always on <strong>a list</strong>. The number of elected candidates in a list is counted as in the closed list system. The people who get elected within a list are the ones who have got the most votes.

:Clarification on the issue of ranking candidates on an open-list:

Line 175 ⟶ 174:

|-

| <div align="left">'''Seat 1'''</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">340,000</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">280,000</div>

| <div align="center">160,000</div>

Line 183 ⟶ 182:

| <div align="left">'''Seat 2'''</div>

| <div align="center">170,000</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">280,000</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">160,000</div>

| <div align="center">60,000</div>

Line 189 ⟶ 188:

|-----

| <div align="left">'''Seat 3'''</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">170,000</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">140,000</div>

| <div align="center">160,000</div>

Line 198 ⟶ 197:

| <div align="center">113,333</div>

| <div align="center">140,000</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">160,000</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">60,000</div>

| <div align="center">40,000</div>

Line 204 ⟶ 203:

| <div align="left">'''Seat 5'''</div>

| <div align="center">113,333</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">140,000</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">80,000</div>

| <div align="center">60,000</div>

Line 210 ⟶ 209:

|-----

| <div align="left">'''Seat 6'''</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">113,333</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">93,333</div>

| <div align="center">80,000</div>

Line 218 ⟶ 217:

| <div align="left">'''Seat 7'''</div>

| <div align="center">85,000</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">93,333</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">80,000</div>

| <div align="center">60,000</div>

Line 224 ⟶ 223:

|-----

| <div align="left">'''Seat 8'''</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">85,000</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">70,000</div>

| <div align="center">80,000</div>

Line 233 ⟶ 232:

| <div align="center">68,000</div>

| <div align="center">70,000</div>

| <div align="center"><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FF0000;">80,000</fontspan></div>

| <div align="center">60,000</div>

| <div align="center">40,000</div>

Line 339 ⟶ 338:

As already stated, not only is the Allocation section not using d'Hondt method (divisors), it is using the formula for a completely different Droop/Hagenbach-Bischoff method (quotas). This is unacceptable and needs to get fixed ASAP. Sources: Taagepera, R., & Shugart, M. S. (1989). Seats and votes: The effects and determinants of electoral systems. New Haven: Yale University Press. (p. 31); Nohlen, D. (1990). Wahlrecht und Parteiensystem. Opladen: Leske Verlag + Budrich GmbH. (p. 81); Lijphart, A. (1994) Electoral Systems and Party Systems: A Study of Twenty-Seven Democracies, 1945-1990. New York: Oxford University Press. (p. 155-157, 192); Farrell, D. M. (1997) Comparing Electoral Systems. London: Prentice Hall/Harvester Wheatsheaf. (p. 62-64) <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/89.102.172.8|89.102.172.8]] ([[User talk:89.102.172.8#top|talk]]) 23:04, 11 February 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Contradiction ==

This passage would seem to contradict itself:

<blockquote>The D'Hondt method minimizes the number of votes that need to be left aside so that the remaining votes are represented exactly proportionally. Only the D'Hondt method (and methods equivalent to it) minimizes this disproportionality. Empirical studies based on other, more popular concepts of disproportionality show that the D'Hondt method is one of the least proportional among the proportional representation methods.</blockquote>

Does D'Hondt minimize disproportionality—or not?  -- [[User:Calion|Calion]] | [[User talk:Calion|Talk]] 14:07, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

== s and s ==

In the Procedure section, the algebraic symbol ''s'' is used first for the number of seats won so far by a party and then for the total number of seats to be assigned. Change one or the other, but to what? —[[User:Tamfang|Tamfang]] ([[User talk:Tamfang|talk]]) 05:17, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

== Clarity ==

This is a very unclear Wikipedia entry, apparently written for those who already are experts in the topic. [[Special:Contributions/119.18.0.19|119.18.0.19]] ([[User talk:119.18.0.19|talk]]) 21:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)