This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Given New York's fusion rules, this article could benefit from listing all the parties nominating the various candidates in each year. Timrollpickering 17:33, 21 January 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Timrollpickering: That could be included in the notes parameter, or footnoted. BD2412T 16:38, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
Regarding my recent edits, all these lists should be in proper chronological order. There is no reason an encyclopedia would have a list written backwards. This is not a newspaper, and should not be subject to WP:Recentism (@BD2412 and JayCoop: Pinging recent editors for their opinions and support.) —GoldRingChip
Reverted for discussion. More recent elections receive far more pageviews, indicating that they are the subject of substantially greater reader interest. We should present the information that the readers are most interested in first. This is one of a series of fifty-one articles on elections by state, and they should be kept consistent in their presentation, and not revised on an individual basis. They have a long-established layout, and there should be a centralized discussion establishing consensus for a change to this presentation for all of them. BD2412T 16:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
Those are 2 arguments: A) should they be backwards?; and B) should they be consistent? I agree that they should be consistent, and I suppose that's why you reverted until we get consensus. But I propose that we get that consensus. As for the order, WP:Recentism sort of addresses this, but not completely. Most articles on historical events, especially those with lists, are in chronological order. Just, for example, List of presidents of the United States starts with Washington. —GoldRingChip 00:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
There is another way that starting with the most recent election produces consistency across the articles. For all of those that conform to this pattern, you see the same election at the top, that of 2020. Before this election, the 2016 election was at the top of every page. It doesn't work the other way, since the states were admitted at different points in history. A handful would start with the first elections held after the American Revolution (which are very different, because they preceded use of the popular vote to assign electors); some would start in elections of the 1830s or the 1850s, prior to the paradigm shift of the Civil War; some would start in the 1870s or 1880s or 1910s; a few would start later than that. Right now, you see the same structure as soon as you open any page, and that only works where all the states are arranged to begin with elections in which all the states have participated. BD2412T 01:28, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
That's an interesting point. But I suggest that first-to-last would still work because they would consistently have 2020 elections at the bottom. Should we change all the congressional district articles to list their members backwards for the same reason? —GoldRingChip 14:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
Are we going to implement some function by which these pages open at the bottom rather than the top? I'm talking about consistency in appearance across these pages when they open. How will this be achieved? BD2412T 16:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
