Talk:1977 South West African Turnhalle Plan referendum
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Lysippos in topic Numbers
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Numbers
editSomething is strange. If out of 51.975 registered voters 64.90% voted, it equals 33.732 votes. So "Yes" is either 94.69% or 30,329 votes. One figure is clearly wrong, as 30,329 votes out of 33,732 is about 89% or 94.60% is 31.941 votes. Same procedure then also applies to "No votes"... --Chtrede (talk) 18:19, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Chtrede: You're forgetting about invalid votes, which would be included in the total turnout, but not in the percentage calculations for Yes/No. From the figures, it looks like there were probably around 1,700 invalid votes, which would leave a similar number of valid 'no' votes. The following number can be filled into the table to make the percentages come out correctly. Number 57 18:27, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Choice Votes % For 30,329 94.69 Against 1,700 5.31 Invalid/blank votes 1,703 – Total 33,732 100 Eligible voters/turnout 51,975 64.90 Source: Direct Democracy
- See the article and the source. No invalid votes. --Chtrede (talk) 19:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- The invalid numbers are unknown, just like the 'no' votes, hence why the cell is empty here and dashed out in the source. Number 57 20:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- Have you had a look at the source? You might be right, but the source says differently. But "might be right" is no valid source in WP ;-) --Chtrede (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:02, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I have, this was the first thing I checked after you made the claim above. I just posted an explanation on your talk page on de.wiki after you reverted there. "---" does not mean there were no invalid votes, it's used by the source to show unknown data, hence why it's also used in the valid votes and no votes rows. Number 57 10:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Pisani (1986, Continuity and Change) notes that there were 32 123 registered voters, but 52 000 voters in total were eligible to vote. Pisani also writes that consequently 61,8% participated in the election in 18 (!) constituencies on 17 May 1977. The information on page 384 is therefore incomplete (only 14 constituencies). Further: „Approximately 5,29 per cent, or 1700, opposed the Turnhalle’s proposed constitutional model ...“ This is identical with the specifications in the SAIRR RR Survey 1977: „During may, a referendum … among white voters …“ and „About 61 per cent of the total electorate of 32 029 endorsed the plan. Only about 1 700 voted "no".“ This source is incomplete and therefore irritating. --Lysippos (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- The wording used by that source is very odd; 'Electorate' means 'Registered/eligible voters', not people who voted. 32,029 appears to be the sum of the valid votes. Number 57 20:24, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Pisani (1986, Continuity and Change) notes that there were 32 123 registered voters, but 52 000 voters in total were eligible to vote. Pisani also writes that consequently 61,8% participated in the election in 18 (!) constituencies on 17 May 1977. The information on page 384 is therefore incomplete (only 14 constituencies). Further: „Approximately 5,29 per cent, or 1700, opposed the Turnhalle’s proposed constitutional model ...“ This is identical with the specifications in the SAIRR RR Survey 1977: „During may, a referendum … among white voters …“ and „About 61 per cent of the total electorate of 32 029 endorsed the plan. Only about 1 700 voted "no".“ This source is incomplete and therefore irritating. --Lysippos (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I have, this was the first thing I checked after you made the claim above. I just posted an explanation on your talk page on de.wiki after you reverted there. "---" does not mean there were no invalid votes, it's used by the source to show unknown data, hence why it's also used in the valid votes and no votes rows. Number 57 10:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- Have you had a look at the source? You might be right, but the source says differently. But "might be right" is no valid source in WP ;-) --Chtrede (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:02, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- The invalid numbers are unknown, just like the 'no' votes, hence why the cell is empty here and dashed out in the source. Number 57 20:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- See the article and the source. No invalid votes. --Chtrede (talk) 19:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hmmm, presumably, it could be meant like this. Pisani (1986, p.341): ″Nearly 95 per cent of the white voters supported the ethnic interim government proposed by the Turnhalle …″ The difference between 32 029 and 32 123 could have been invalid votes (94). Pisani on p. 384 (a table with results): Pisani cites here a total of 92 invalid ballots ("Spoilt papers") in 14 constituencies. --Lysippos (talk) 21:48, 18 December 2020 (UTC)