Talk:Ranked voting
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ranked voting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 1 year  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
[edit]
Should this be merged with the article on Score Voting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Score_voting)? There's actually a few articles related to alternative voting methods focused on related concepts, and most of them are borderline-stub articles. 137.118.200.159 (talk) 18:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- Almost certainly not. It might make sense to merge the "Score voting" article with the "Cardinal voting" article (since Score and Cardinal voting use the same ballot type), and it might make sense to merge the "Ranked voting" and "Preferential voting" articles (since Ranked and Preferential voting use the same ballot type). -- RobLa (talk) 22:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Comparison and Evaluation of Ranked Voting Systems[edit]
This is a big change, and so I want to discuss it before I make it: Myclob (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (May 2023) |
Analysis Using Examples[edit]
Michael Gallagher points out that the strengths and weaknesses of different ranked voting methods can be best elucidated through specific examples.[1] A practical example can be provided by considering a voter's ranking of candidates: "If A is eliminated, the voter's vote is transferred to B. If B is then eliminated, the voter's vote is transferred to C. This process continues until one candidate has a majority of the votes," explains Steven Brams and Peter Fishburn.[2]
Applying Logical Voting Criteria[edit]
Logical voting criteria play a crucial role in evaluating voting methods. The Condorcet criterion, as defined by Duncan Black, states that "the candidate who would win in a head-to-head race against all other candidates should be the winner of the election."[3] Moreover, the independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA) criterion, explained by Kenneth Arrow, implies that "the ranking of candidates should not change if the order of the candidates is changed."[4]
Empirical Approach: Simulated Elections[edit]
Steven Brams and Peter Fishburn highlight the utility of simulated elections as a means to study the properties of ranked voting methods.[5] These simulations can estimate the 'efficacy' of each voting method, which is defined by how frequently it elects the candidate closest to the center of the voter distribution. In terms of these simulations, Andrew Reynolds indicates that "Condorcet methods and Coombs' method tend to deliver optimal outcomes, followed by the Borda count. Instant-runoff voting comes further behind, with first-past-the-post voting trailing."[6] Myclob (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ Gallagher, Michael (2011). Comparison of Electoral Systems. Oxford University Press. p. 25.
- ^ Brams, Steven; Fishburn, Peter (2007). The Mathematics of Voting. Princeton University Press. p. 13.
- ^ Black, Duncan (1958). The Theory of Voting. Cambridge University Press. p. 12.
- ^ Arrow, Kenneth (1963). Social Choice and Individual Values. Wiley. p. 10.
- ^ Brams, Steven; Fishburn, Peter (2007). The Mathematics of Voting. Princeton University Press. p. 14.
- ^ Reynolds, Andrew (2011). Electoral Systems: The Key to Power. Routledge. p. 12.
Regarding the section of “Other methods“[edit]
May I please receive the green light to fix the first point there, considering that it refers to ranked voting as such an other method, despite the whole article being about ranked voting in the first place, while it's description is also incoherent and seems to mix things up with elements of yet another voting method?
For now I am thinking that the point there was meant to be about score voting instead. Wulfstrex (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Slovenia?[edit]
@Keraleais: Might it be worth a mention in this article that Slovenia used ranked choice voting for some offices for a certain period, with references, of course? It would be best if a reference could be found with a plausible discussion of why it was changed? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 23:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're right. To my knowledge, the ranked system was used to elect the two minority MPs from 2000 to 2018, until it was replaced by the amendment known as ZVDZ-D, in the 2022 general election First Past the Post was already used. The reason for change was simplification, the amendments were proposed by the two minority MPs. I'll update with reference to RTVSLO (national broadcaster - in slovene) Keraleais (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)