Talk:2024 French legislative election

Individual parties' results

Is it possible to have a table showing the final tallies for individual parties, as distinct from electoral alliances? For instance, the New Popular Front won 180 seats, but La France Insoumise won only 75, which is a relatively small portion. How many seats did the Socialists, the Communists, the Ecologists etc. each win? This is potentially important as it may affect the formation of a government or the choice of prime minister.
Note: There already is such a table for the pre-election numbers. It seems crazy to have a table for that and not for post-election numbers. 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:9492:4261:8A83:5507 (talk) 14:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I don't understand why only the National Rally's coalition results are broken down by party the results. — Kawnhr (talk) 17:05, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

No, because those tallies have not been officially calculated by the Ministry of the Interior, which is the standard source for all French elections, and all other breakdowns of results by party are unofficial and depend significantly on the judgement of those working with the data by candidate (which often includes many edge cases, because candidates are not required to declare a party, and often have the official support of multiple parties regardless of their financial attachment).

I would like for it to be possible as well but those classifications in other sources can't easily be compatibilised with the existing results reported by the Ministry of the Interior (and are very often conflicting/outdated, even in different articles published around the same time – there are already many conflicting counts for the number of deputies attributed to each party in the newly elected National Assembly, and I've strained to emphasise as much as possible here that these counts vary by source and this article like 2022 only relies on the Ministry of the Interior and Le Monde tallies), which often erroneously classifies candidates under different labels, and as noted above, arbitrarily separates them in some cases but not others (for example, sometimes grouping EELV with all ecologist candidates in some years but not others, separating Ciottist candidates but not all of them, etc.)

The pre-election composition here is already pretty fragile and I had to recalculate it maybe four or five times here in a few other spreadsheets because, again, there is no official list of deputies by party membership, only by their affiliation with parliamentary groups, which is not really helpful as deputies who nominally declare they are from the same party can still sit in different groups (which is especially the case with some of these smaller parties), and it can be difficult to track down statements from elected deputies about which party they belong to if any in some cases.

The party affiliations reported on the lists of deputies in the National Assembly on fr.wp are also pretty fragile due to these reasons (and as myself and some other editors have discovered while updating tables here, can still be outdated or misattributed), and really reflects our best guess. It's much harder to do the same process with the results table because that requires re-confirming labels for all 4,010 candidates, which is just not feasible or easily verifiable anymore. 73.169.176.209 (talk) 20:40, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

If there is a reliable source showing breakdown of votes and seats by party (rather than alliance), then it can be shown like at 2023 Polish parliamentary election#Sejm. If only the seat breakdown is available, that can be done too (using the vspan parameter of the infobox (example here). Number 57 21:06, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

In this case there isn't because they have to be re-calculated on the basis of classifications which other sources have to first derive themselves, and most of them prefer to reclassify a number of candidates attributed to some alliances/labels from the Ministry of the Interior to the point that they're no longer compatible with the overall totals. I haven't seen any sources attempt to recalculate vote totals within these alliances, however (only total elected deputies, which is a far easier task than re-classifying 4,010 individual candidates – and again, as mentioned above, even these totals are not compatible with those of the Ministry of Interior because there are both NFP-classified and non-NFP-classified deputies attributed to the same party in other sources), and every other news source compiling results keeps the NFP and Ensemble results collapsed. I don't see any reason to do so either because this was also the case in 2022, and the 2022 article also does not make any effort to break out those results by party for the same reason. I would note that the French-language 2022 article: fr:Élections législatives françaises de 2022#Résultats par coalition does do so but it's all entirely manual and depends on the work of many individual editors who identified party affiliations for each candidate in every constituency before summing those together, and the 2024 fr.wp version of that table isn't anywhere close to complete (and I'd argue that it suffers from much worse verifiability problems compared to just doing those calculations for 577 deputies as opposed to the usual six or seven thousand candidates). 73.169.176.209 (talk) 21:14, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm just a little confused here. Are you saying that the editors for the french-language article are finding the party affiliations of the candidates themselves? Also, breakdowns by party could easily be provided from the Le Monde source, since it's a reliable one, as long as its presented as from that source and not as an official result. AnOpenBook (talk) 04:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Correct on that first point (also goes for party affiliations of individual deputies), and on the second point there isn't a vote total or share breakdown by party from Le Monde, just a total count of deputies elected. However, the classification of deputies is incompatible with displaying them in the same table as the Ministry of the Interior results because there are, in the case of both the NFP and Ensemble, deputies who were classified as part of that alliance by the Ministry of the Interior but not Le Monde and vice versa. 73.169.176.209 (talk) 08:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

For the first point, I'm pretty sure that would violate WP:OR if used in the corresponding english-language article. For the second, I don't see why that means we couldn't create a second table separate from the Ministry of the Interior results with the Le Monde projections for party composition. AnOpenBook (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Another month has gone by, and there is still no table. Surely people know by now how many seats the Socialists, Renaissance, the Republicans etc. each won! If Ministry of the Interior results still aren't available, but it's possible to create a table from Le Monde, then that's what should be done ASAP. The article is next to useless if it lists all the parties running but doesn't say how they did. @AnOpenBook, Number 57, and Kawnhr:. --2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:F0A5:3513:A27D:424 (talk) 11:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Lede

The lead of a Wikipedia article should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points, including any prominent controversies.

The opening four paragraphs do not provide a concise overview. There is need of serious editing - keeping the reader of the article foremost in mind. Jd2718 (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree that the fourth paragraph needs to be edited down to something more concise and readable, and the media estimates found in paragraph three could be removed, but I'd say the rest is a fairly good summary. AnOpenBook (talk) 22:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

I removed some repetition and tightened phrasing while adding the point of the timing in accepting the second resignation (so that the ministers could vote in the election of the president of the National Assembly). (cf. the constitutional question of the separation of powers) This is a key point as it made the difference in the election between Braun Pivet and Chassagne. -- SashiRolls ^{🌿 · 🍥} 13:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

References

Thank you. This is clearly more readable. I think some reordering is still in order - since the lede is long, the key info needs to be up front - specifically that this election resulted in a hung parliament. If no one else does this, I may modify the opening paragraph and lightly remove detail from the rest (of course any detail removed remains in the body of the article) Jd2718 (talk) 12:00, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Lucie Castets infobox?

Now that the NFP have named their Prime Ministerial candidate in Lucie Castets, what are people's thoughts on including her in the infobox (with an efn specifying that she isn't the "Leader", but was named candidate by the party à la 2023 Poland)? I remember the archived conversation where I argued against putting PM Candidates in the Infobox if they weren't also the leader, but in this case I feel like, as long as there's an efn specifying that she's not acting in the role of the coalition's leader or anything to that effect (and making sure it's still clear that the NFP has a collective leadership), it would be better to show her face and name there than to have that party logo in place of a photo of a person. I'll ping the people who took part (or were invited to take part) in the last discussion. @Basque mapping @T8612 @ValenciaThunderbolt @FreakingEmu @Kawnhr @Chuborno @Mason.Jones @Muaza Husni @David O. Johnson @Borgerland @Braganza – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 07:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

she was named after the election and is still mostly unknown, so im against listing her Braganza (talk) 07:59, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@Braganza: Agreed. She was a candidate after the election, not during. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 10:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Would you be in favour of her inclusion should she be named Prime Minister by Macron? – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:10, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@GlowstoneUnknown: No. If she were the candidate during the election, yes. However, she wasn't, so she shouldn't be included. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 10:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I feel like "during the election" is subjective here, she wasn't the candidate during the campaign, sure, but the election's outcome is still uncertain, so I think her inclusion is warranted. Also purely from an aesthetics standpoint, listing "collective leadership" just doesn't look good in TIE, especially if they're the first-place party. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:21, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@GlowstoneUnknown: It isn't really, as she wasn't during the election. You can say "she wasn't the candidate during the campaign, sure, but the election's outcome is still uncertain". The election happened, she wasn't the candidate, end of. Essentially, her inclusion misinforms readers that as she was the leading candidate during the election, which we know she wasn't. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 10:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Matteusz Morawiecki wasn't named Prime Ministerial candidate until after the 2023 election as well, but he's still listed in the infobox – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Hmm... you make a good case. Personally, I'd do a away with him in TIE. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 10:35, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I'd at least like to include her if she does get appointed Prime Minister by Macron in the next week or two. Since with TIE, I'd personally find it weird if the electee wasn't included in the infobox previously. (I specify "with TIE", since Netherlands 2023 doesn't look particulary jarring showing Schoof winning thanks to the visual layout of TILE). – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:43, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe Morawiecki was not explicitly said to be the "PM candidate" during the campaign, but he was the incumbent prime minister and was obviously the person who would head another PiS cabinet. Not the same situation at all. — Kawnhr (talk) 16:44, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

She didn't even have a French Wikipedia article Braganza (talk) 10:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't see the relevance? – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:25, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

showing her as the candidate of NFP even though she was unknown is extremely misleading imo Braganza (talk) 10:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Why? She is the NFP candidate. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

@GlowstoneUnknown: I agree with you on this part of the argument. Just because she's an unknown, doesn't mean she shouldn't be included. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 10:35, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

AFTER the election, she was no Lead candidate during the campaign Braganza (talk) 10:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

To my knowledge, neither was Mateusz Morawiecki, also, that's an entirely different argument you're making. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

No, I don't think she should. The election infobox should show the person who lead the party during the election, and Castets has only been put forward as a candidate in the aftermath. We generally do not have 'retrospective' leaders like that; if a person other than the leader leads the government instead, this just gets put in the "PM after election…" bit at the bottom of the infobox, generally with an EFN tag to explain it (eg: 2024 Pakistani general election, 2018 Italian general election, 1921 Alberta general election).

Incidentally, since we're on the subject of the infobox, Ensemble's leader should be Gabriel Attal. Not only was Attal the incumbent PM, but he was obviously the most prominent figure in the party's campaign. I mean, just look at 2024_French_legislative_election#Ensemble… Attal is the one making policy proposals (and gets his portrait in the section), while Sejourné has exactly one, off-hand mention. It's strange that we continue to have Sejourné in the infobox when he wasn't a major player in the election at all. — Kawnhr (talk) 16:53, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I'd also like to add that NUPÈS had a collective leadership as well, but Mélenchon was still listed in the 2022 election page. I just find it to be an absolute eyesore to have no picture there, especially considering it was the winning alliance. If it were a minor party listed lower down à la "WA Nationals" in 2010 Australia, but a winning party at the top of the infobox looks just plain strange having no photo of a leading figure, which in my opinion, Castets is, regardless of whether she was leading during the campaign. I consider the events of the election to be ongoing until a Prime Minister is named, and her nomination by the coalition was just over 2 weeks after the polls closed, which in my opinion, is near enough to the election date to be considered relevant enough to include in the infobox. If her nomination were after a month or more, I wouldn't be advocating for this, but I feel her exclusion from the infobox doesn't make sense here. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 10:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

What makes two weeks after the polls close a reasonable timeframe to name a leader, but four weeks too much? — Kawnhr (talk) 18:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)