Talk:National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 90 days

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 11, 2008	Good article nominee	Not listed
July 17, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
April 5, 2009	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Elections and Referendums

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

United States: Presidential elections Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Mid-importance).

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Should the map have another color?[edit]

Some states that used to be yellow / pending on the map are now gray. I assume that is because the bill was introduced there, but was defeated or otherwise died. It might be useful to have two shades of gray: One for states where the bill was never before the state legislature, and one for where it was defeated. SlowJog (talk) 14:24, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that perharbs a map like the one you're describing would be fiting in the "Bills receiving floor votes in previous sessions" subsection. IchAiBims (talk) 12:07, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bills have been before legislatures in all 50 states and DC. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 14:46, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that in dark mode, the colours on the status map don't display. Only reappearing when switched back to light mode.

Deepred6502 (talk) 15:01, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Enactment prospects[edit]

I disagree with the evisceration of this section. This section should state clearly IN TEXT the CURRENT STATUS of enactment prospects, and assuming that the reader should want to analyze what the data is in the infobox or in the adoption history is wrong. What remains here now is out of date, and the Republican adoptions clearly belongs in history, so I will rectify these issues. Robert92107 (talk) 03:09, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check your attitude Robert. I'm going to insist you follow WP:BRD and respect the WP:STATUSQUO, meaning you'll need other editors to support the disputed changes you want to make. Each of the sections you're so worked up about has been the way it is for a long time and for good reasons. The prose about adoptions in red states is specifically relevant to Nate Silver's point and belongs with it. I'm not aware of anything there or anywhere that's out of date; there are a number of editors who are incredibly on top of all legislative actions on NPVIC bills. All the details on those bills and referendums appear in the clearly named "Bills and referendums" section, which is hatnoted in Adoption. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 16:29, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quick review of all states and problem with Missouri[edit]

Hi, not a native english speaker here, so sorry if I am unclear in anyway, let me know i'll try to be clearer in my explanations. I decided to do little review of all states legislatures which have not pass a NPVIC act yet and I came along a few problems: First of all, I was unable to reach legislatures in Louisiana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin, and even sources already on this page sent me to web pages saying the link do not works, so, don't know if it is because my IP is outside the US or if the sites are really down, No information from me on those state.

More importantly, I've come across 2 bills in Missouri dated from 2023, they don't seem to have been rejected or anything, but I don't know if it has been indefinitely postponed or if it is still pending (https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB997&year=2023&code=R and https://house.mo.gov/Bill.aspx?bill=HB829&year=2023&code=R)

For the rest, I'll just update the page with the infos I've collected Niivlem (talk) 14:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Missouri bills were listed in this article previously. They were changed to "died in committee" in this edit, then removed as failed in this edit. I don't know enough to verify these edits, and the bills appear to be in the current session for the Missouri legislature. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 15:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump v. Anderson's Impact on NPVIC[edit]

I'm curious if this case will have any impact on the NPVIC. While in particular it has to do with eligibility for candidates to be placed on the ballot, I'm under the impression that the ruling also influences how state electors should act in some way. Just had this thought in the back of my head. Indochina2 (talk) 11:17, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Florida[edit]

Bush didn’t win Florida as stated. Bush was awarded Florida by the Supreme Court. Recounts gave it Gore 73.159.217.224 (talk) 02:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's complicated, but it's unfair to say that recounts gave it to Gore, only that recounts *could* have done that were they not halted. 2000 United States presidential election recount in Florida is a helluva read. The Savage Norwegian 04:55, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]