Talk:2007 Danish general election

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

Denmark High‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark 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.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sorting

Maybe the party names in the opinion polls should be sorted in a more neutral way. I sorted them like this in order to give people who are not familiar with Danish politics an idea of their percieved allegiance. However the list of coalitions might have made it redundant. --Bagande 09:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the list of coalitions already convey that information. Should it be added somewhere that only a number of the parties have the 20,000 signatures in order? Liberalisterne haven't got them by a longshot, CD is close, but not there yet, New Alliance will no doubt get them in a month or so. I don't know what the status is for the Minority Party and the Progress Party since both of these are must be almost defunct. Valentinian ^{T / C} 21:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So you agree that the list of coalitions have made it unnecessary? I think that I'll change it but I can't bother doing it twice in case NA doesn't choose N. So it has got to wait a bit. The fact that only some of the parties are as of yet eligible to run is reflected in the way the way they are sectioned. However it might be nice to add a small explanations of what it takes to be allowed to run if you are not already represented.

As for MP and PP, I would like to keep them until they declare that they will not attempt to run. Such a thing might already have been declared but I have not been able to track it down.--Bagande 13:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greenlandic and Faroese parties

I have not been able to find a list similar to the Danish Parties eligible to run for neither Greenland nor the Faroe Islands. Nor have I been able to find any rules stating the requirements that have to be met in order to run in the Faroes and Greenland. It would be nice if somebody could clarify who is eligible to run in GL and FO, who has declared intentions but are as of now not eligible etc.--Bagande 13:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left a notice on the two related wikiprojects recently, but noone has commented so far. A few parties have, however, been moved around in the Greenland area. Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 15:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Dk-KF-logo nyt.png

Image:Dk-KF-logo nyt.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Alliance

With the 20,000 signatures obtained by New Alliance, shouldn't they be moved up to Parties running? Lilac Soul 20:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No answer, it seems. I'll do it, then, and if anybody disagrees, they can move it back and state their reasons here. Lilac Soul 11:36, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikinews interviews

If anyone is interested in their being original interviews of Danish parliamentary candidates on Wikinews, submit questions to my talk page on the English Wikinews. Thanks! -- Zanimum 18:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:RadikaleVenstreElectionLogo.gif

Image:RadikaleVenstreElectionLogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems somebody has handled this already, so no need for anybody else to go there. I think. Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 07:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DanishSocialDemocratsElectionLogo.gif

Image:DanishSocialDemocratsElectionLogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By party

The name "Centrist parties" are POV and are not used in Denmark in any media I know of. See also [1]. The section "By potential coalition" is speculaton about which parties could end up formining goverment and I dont think speculations should be part of a wikipedia article. Only facts in an wikipedia article. Lennart.larsen 12:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Nyalliance.jpg

Image:Nyalliance.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox problems

An infobox was recently added to this article and to a couple of other Danish parliamentary elections. These infoboxes are, however, problematic. The biggest problem is that they are presenting groups of parties, e.g. Venstre, the Conservative People's Party and the Danish People's Party, as if they were one party, thus saying that Venstre got 50.5% of the votes, which is just wrong. As far as I can tell, {{Infobox Election}} cannot present the numbers in a way that makes sense for the Danish many-party system, and in my humble opinion we are better of without it. Another problem is that the numbers in the infoboxes aren't correct: Sambandsflokkurin for example supported Fogh Rasmussen's government but their seat isn't counted for some reason. I don't like undoing someone else's work when it was obviously added in good faith, but I intend to remove these infoboxes again unless someone objects. Hemmingsen 09:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going ahead with removing the infoboxes. A debate is, of course, still welcome if anyone has objections or can see a way to solve the issues. Hemmingsen 09:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

90 seats

"doing so requires 90 seats", this is incorrect. A situation of 89/1/89 keeps the cabinet in place. To not have 90(out of 179) seats against you, it is not required to have 90 for your self. blank votes also exist. independent Jakob Haugård was a declared blank vote in 1994, and at times a north atlantic seat have also declared it self to be blank. If 90 seats is required it wouldn't be "negative parliamentarian". But it is way more secure to have 90 rather than 89. When PM AFR called the election, he also stated that the cabinet didn't resign. By doing so the cabinet would continue if 89 seats opposed him and 1 blank, after the election. 94.145.236.194 (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above is certainly correct, and I've tried clarifying the sentence in the article a bit. -Lilac Soul ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 21:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Helle-Thorning-Schmidt.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Helle-Thorning-Schmidt.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Danish general election, 2007. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:40, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Danish general election, 2007. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:04, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]