Talk:National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

New map

NaPoVoInterCo US States

NaPoVoInterCo US Cartogram

So I thought that the map in the introductory section of the article is a bit improvable. I am new to Wikipedia, so I do not know how to edit that section of the article. I would appreciate it if you can review this map and update the article with these ones. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proudroundearther (talk • contribs) 12:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

The current system we have allows us to update all templates throughout the article in one place. This includes the map, the cartogram, and the "completion bar" in the infobox, as well as text throughout the article and another chart in thee Adoption section. Replacing these with static images would make it much harder to update when changes happen (which is fairly frequent). The Bills section of the article also already gives the information your new maps would provide. Seoltoir22 (talk) 14:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Michigan

Apparently bills have been introduced in the Michigan Senate and House today[1], but I can't find them yet on the Michigan Legislature website. Perhaps I looked wrong, so I'd appreciate anyone double-checking. DFlhb (talk) 18:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Florida isn't pending anymore

The bill appears to have died in Florida in Ethics, Elections & Open Government Subcommittee thus removing it from pending. https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/53 Watch Atlas791 (talk) 10:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Watch Atlas791 - thanks! Will update shortly Henrygg98 (talk) 16:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Minnesota

Minnesota has adopted the NPVIC, according to this relatively reliable source. It was adopted as part of HF1830, the state government omnibus. Other sources may become available and mention this soon as well. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:46, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

As the article mentions at the top, one of the bills covered hasn't yet been signed into law, although it's expected to. My understand is that this refers to the omnibus bill that contains NPVIC, as this other article from the same source today about NPVIC in the state refers to "the omnibus election bill passed by the House and Senate". - Odin (talk) 16:44, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I can't find that in the source linked by Ganesha811, which says Gov. Tim Walz signed them all, and frames Minnesota's NPVIC implementation as a done deal. While our table does list other bills, are we sure they're not subsumed in the one that passed? DFlhb (talk) 08:54, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Walz signed the bill only hours after my original comment, so they presumably updated the article. - Odin (talk) 15:05, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Maine

As someone who isn't as familiar with Maine's system, could someone explain if the bill has actually failed or not? It appears to have been "tabled" in one of the chambers but not in the other, and I can't tell if that means the bill is dead or not. Henrygg98 (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

I think it's time to split off the "Constitutionality" section

@CommonKnowledgeCreator, Perl coder, and Levivich: I suggested this in September 2020 (when the section was called "Legality"). The result was, by my count: one agree, one neutral, and one "not now, but keep an eye on it". Since then, the readable prose size of the article has grown from 34 kB to 79 kB, which WP:SIZESPLIT puts in the "Probably should be divided" category. The "Constitutionality" section is 38 kB (48%) of that.

I'd like to perform this split in the next week. CommonKnowledgeCreator, do you have time to craft the summary that will remain in this article? I think 1-3 sentences for each of the two major subsections would be appropriate, but your call. If you can't, I'll do my best. Thanks! —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 20:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Of course! Since I've written most of the content in the section, I should be obligated to help summarize the two main subsections in the Constitutionality section, although I'd be interested to see what you come up with first and then maybe expand on it. Would that content double as the lede content of the new article? I reviewed the WP:Splitting rule of thumb recommendations for size splits and definitely agree that the Constitutionality section should probably be split off into a separate article. Not sure what the total byte size of the Constitutionality section is, but since it contains 167 of the article's 427 references (or 39 percent), probably a good chunk of the article's 269,855 bytes. (Just out of curiosity, how do you compute the readable prose size? Do you just copy and save the content into a Microsoft Word file, remove the refs and hyperlinks, and then look at the byte size of the file, or is there some sort of application on Wikipedia that I don't know about that does this?)

However, I've found a few more CRS reports about contingent elections, the Electoral Count Act, the Electoral College vote count, and presidential succession that are good sources for some content that should be mentioned in debates about the NPVIC, and I also looked back over the text of Federalist No. 68 and The Anti-Federalist Papers edited by Ralph Ketchum Ketcham and saw some things there that probably should be mentioned in the NPVIC article as well. Most of this content will probably go in the Continuity of government and peaceful transitions of power secondary subsection that I've added to the Protective function of the Electoral College subsection, but some will go in the Vertical and horizontal balance of power shifts secondary subsection and I'd like to be able to figure out what exactly would go where before we complete the split if possible. I'd also be interested to see just how much longer the readable prose size of the article will get afterwards. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:53, 5 July 2023 (UTC)