Talk:1960 South African republic referendum: Difference between revisions
Changed class |
m Reverted edit by 41.116.139.15 (talk) to last version by Qwerfjkl (bot) |
||
(22 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C| |
|||
{{AfricaProject|class=C|importance=High|South Africa=yes}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Elections and Referendums}} |
|||
{{WikiProject South Africa|importance=High |politics=yes |attention= }} |
|||
}} |
|||
==Colours in infobox are misleading== |
|||
The 'Yes' and 'No' colours are displaying as pale blue for Yes and green for No, while the map shows all the provinces which voted Yes coloured solid green and the one which voted No solid red. Can someone please fix this? [[User:Moonraker|Moonraker]] ([[User talk:Moonraker|talk]]) 22:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Wording of the referendum == |
|||
[[User:Johnsc1277]], here is a picture of the ballot paper right from the ''[[Government Gazette of South Africa|Government Gazette]]'': |
|||
[[File:South Africa republic referendum 1960 ballot paper.png|600px]] |
|||
Please stop changing it to the wrong wording. - [[User:Htonl|htonl]] ([[User talk:Htonl|talk]]) 15:06, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:Here's [http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/9511/KPC_115_6.jpg?sequence=6&isAllowed=y another photo] which shows the wording of the ballot (top center). [http://www.andrewcusack.com/net/wp-content/uploads/saprocrep8.jpg And another]. - [[User:Htonl|htonl]] ([[User talk:Htonl|talk]]) 15:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
@Htonl, It's or not for. [[User:Johnsc1277|Johnsc1277]] ([[User talk:Johnsc1277|talk]]) 16:34, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:Why? How can you keep saying this when all the evidence proves you are wrong? - [[User:Htonl|htonl]] ([[User talk:Htonl|talk]]) 16:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
No, you are wrong. [[User:Johnsc1277|Johnsc1277]] ([[User talk:Johnsc1277|talk]]) 16:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:{{ping|Htonl}} Don't waste your time with this, this is clearly someone who [[WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT|doesn't want to hear]] or is simply a wind-up merchant. If they revert again, they'll probably be blocked. [[User:Number 57|<span style="color:orange;">Number</span>]] [[User talk:Number 57|<span style="color:green;">5</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Number 57|<span style="color:blue;">7</span>]] 16:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
I am not a wind up merchant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [[User:Johnsc1277|Johnsc1277]] ([[User talk:Johnsc1277|talk]]) 17:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
== Results by electoral division == |
|||
Referendum results by electoral division (parliamentary constituency) as published on the Government Gazette are now included in the article. The relevant table probably deserves its own article, but I will leave such task to others. [[User:Manuel Alvarez-Rivera|Manuel Alvarez-Rivera]] ([[User talk:Manuel Alvarez-Rivera|talk]]) 02:37, 2 July 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Ping|Manuel Alvarez-Rivera}} Thanks for adding them! One small issue – in the registered voters column, the total adds up to 1,800,425, which is one short of the actual total; I assume there must be a typo somewhere. Cheers, [[User:Number 57|<span style="color: orange;">Number</span>]] [[User talk:Number 57|<span style="color: green;">5</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Number 57|<span style="color: blue;">7</span>]] 10:44, 2 July 2022 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Number 57|Number 57]] You're welcome. The cited discrepancy is in Transvaal Province, where according to the Government Gazette there were a total of 818,047 registered voters, but the electoral division figures add up to 818,046. The same discrepancy is also present in the referendum results on page 113 of Dr. Heard's book, in which the Transvaal constituencies were grouped in four areas (Johannesburg, Witwatersrand, Pretoria and the rest of the province). |
|||
::Incidentally, there's another error in the Government Gazette statistics: the total number of votes in Cape Province add up to 544,083 (both row- and column-wise), but the published figure was 554,083. [[User:Manuel Alvarez-Rivera|Manuel Alvarez-Rivera]] ([[User talk:Manuel Alvarez-Rivera|talk]]) 15:16, 2 July 2022 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks – I think it's worth adding a note to the constituency table to explain the discrepancy (which I've just done). Cheers, [[User:Number 57|<span style="color: orange;">Number</span>]] [[User talk:Number 57|<span style="color: green;">5</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Number 57|<span style="color: blue;">7</span>]] 18:45, 2 July 2022 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 16:18, 19 April 2024
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Colours in infobox are misleading
[edit]The 'Yes' and 'No' colours are displaying as pale blue for Yes and green for No, while the map shows all the provinces which voted Yes coloured solid green and the one which voted No solid red. Can someone please fix this? Moonraker (talk) 22:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Wording of the referendum
[edit]User:Johnsc1277, here is a picture of the ballot paper right from the Government Gazette:
Please stop changing it to the wrong wording. - htonl (talk) 15:06, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Here's another photo which shows the wording of the ballot (top center). And another. - htonl (talk) 15:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
@Htonl, It's or not for. Johnsc1277 (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Why? How can you keep saying this when all the evidence proves you are wrong? - htonl (talk) 16:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
No, you are wrong. Johnsc1277 (talk) 16:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Htonl: Don't waste your time with this, this is clearly someone who doesn't want to hear or is simply a wind-up merchant. If they revert again, they'll probably be blocked. Number 57 16:58, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
I am not a wind up merchant!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Johnsc1277 (talk) 17:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Results by electoral division
[edit]Referendum results by electoral division (parliamentary constituency) as published on the Government Gazette are now included in the article. The relevant table probably deserves its own article, but I will leave such task to others. Manuel Alvarez-Rivera (talk) 02:37, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Manuel Alvarez-Rivera: Thanks for adding them! One small issue – in the registered voters column, the total adds up to 1,800,425, which is one short of the actual total; I assume there must be a typo somewhere. Cheers, Number 57 10:44, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Number 57 You're welcome. The cited discrepancy is in Transvaal Province, where according to the Government Gazette there were a total of 818,047 registered voters, but the electoral division figures add up to 818,046. The same discrepancy is also present in the referendum results on page 113 of Dr. Heard's book, in which the Transvaal constituencies were grouped in four areas (Johannesburg, Witwatersrand, Pretoria and the rest of the province).
- Incidentally, there's another error in the Government Gazette statistics: the total number of votes in Cape Province add up to 544,083 (both row- and column-wise), but the published figure was 554,083. Manuel Alvarez-Rivera (talk) 15:16, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks – I think it's worth adding a note to the constituency table to explain the discrepancy (which I've just done). Cheers, Number 57 18:45, 2 July 2022 (UTC)