Talk:California's 37th congressional district special election, 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	California's 37th congressional district special election, 2007 is part of WikiProject U.S. Congress, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the United States Congress.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. The options are: "FA", "A", "GA", "B", "Start", "Stub", "List", "Disambiguation", "Template", or "Category."
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. The options are: "Top", "High", "Mid", and "Low."
event	This article is about one (or many) event(s).

[edit] Wording

"The district has been historically Democratic, so it came as little surprise when no Republican was able to manage a remotely significant percentage of the vote. The highest-placing Republican, John M. Kanaley, could only put together a meager 2,230 votes, or 7.64% of the total."
Someone is going to have to explain to me what in this paragraph is "inappropriate for an encyclopedia." Encyclopedias often use colorful language so it's not just a stodgy list of facts. See also WP:NOT: "Articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader." It is not "biased" to describe 7% as a "meager" amount, or not "a remotely significant percentage." Maybe I'm being accused of bias against single-digit numbers? Anyone? Rowsdower45 01:43, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not accusing you of "bias against single-digit numbers" nor am I dening that 2,230 votes, or 7.64% of the total is a low amount. All I'm saying is that we don't need to three times use phrases restating that fact. The numbers are self explanatory, and my text: ("The district has been historically Democratic, so it came as little surprise when the highest-placing Republican, John M. Kanaley, received only 2,230 votes, or 7.64% of the total.") does not remove anything that helps put the facts inclued in the article into context.--Tdl1060 17:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bias against third parties

The part "Both candidates released polls, each showing that person in the lead [www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-race27jun27,1,2407506.story?coll=la-headlines-california]" under interesting facts is rather out of place considering there are FOUR candidates in the runoff, not two.

   I edited the page to address this problem.  user:calbear22 July 23, 2007

[edit] Additions by calbear22

I'd like to admit that some of what I have done so far is incomplete. I will continue to work on improving what's one this page. As always, anyone is more than welcome to improve what is already on this page.