User talk:William S. Saturn

Welcome to the talk page for William S. Saturn. Click here to begin a new section.

USPE, 2016 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect USPE, 2016. Since you had some involvement with the USPE, 2016 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 06:59, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

USPE, 2012 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect USPE, 2012. Since you had some involvement with the USPE, 2012 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 07:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

USPE, 2008 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect USPE, 2008. Since you had some involvement with the USPE, 2008 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 07:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

USPE12 listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect USPE12. Since you had some involvement with the USPE12 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 07:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Darcy Richardson 2012.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Darcy Richardson 2012.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:21, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions Regarding Early Presidential Primaries (1940 and Back)

I've been working collecting data on the results for the Democratic Presidential caucuses or state conventions that were held in earlier years, 1940 being the starting point given I was interested at the time in the Anti-Third Term movement that had sprung up then, and while I can't access all the data in question anyway (I'm using the New York Times as a source, but I'm not a subscriber and so can't look at the articles in detail), I've provided them in the talk pages. Having gotten down to 1928 now, however, I'm not certain how best to display the information given, and I'm not sure if there really is a precedent(s) for it given the operational differences between the Modern Primary and the more Archaic Primary of yesteryear. For example;

In 1928 Al Smith clearly won the Democratic Presidential Preference Primary in Ohio over Senator Atlee Pomerene, but the latter was awarded the entirety of the delegation. The situation in question is in an article I provided on the talk page for the '28 Democratic Primaries, but when you have delegates not being bound or awarded based on the results of a Primary, should that be counted as a separate contest? How should we display that on a map? Should one be given preference?
Depending on the year in question you either end up with a handful, none, or a whole slew of favorite-son candidates ready to represent State delegations, and these candidates technically have "won" delegates. However in some cases, like those I identified for the 1968 Republican nomination race, are far more than the infobox could possibly handle when combined with the actual candidates (even if we are just talking about candidates and favorite sons that won delegates, that would make 17). Should we give preference based on delegates won? On actual candidates vs. Favorite Sons? What about if they've withdrawn and endorsed a candidate? Should Favorite Sons be combined somehow (for map and infobox purposes) and explained separately in another section?
In a number of the Presidential Primaries and even Caucuses I have encountered language that the delegates in question are officially unpledged or uninstructed, but have a strong preference or are generally understood for being for a certain candidate. Under those conditions, should those delegations be considered Unpledged, or should they be considered as being for the candidate? Should the votes of those delegations be included in a candidate's vote total?

These are the major questions at the moment. I'll also be asking a few others Presidential Elections Wikiproject as well to chime in, so if you have any ideas on how best I should proceed, I'd ask that the responses be put into Talk:Democratic Party presidential primaries, 1932. Thanks ahead of time. --Ariostos (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Ron Paul logo.jpg

The file File:Ron Paul logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

this image has been superseded by a higher-quality non-copyright protected image (

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SecretName101 (talk) 00:55, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]