Talk:List of premiers of Saskatchewan by time in office

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Saskatchewan / Governments / History Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saskatchewan.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Governments of Canada.
	This article is supported by WikiProject History of Canada.

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) 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.

"Mandates" or "Elections Won" ?[edit]

There's been some leisurely back-and-forth over the name for the last column on the table. Should it be "Mandates" or "Elections Won"? I'm firmly in the "Elections Won" camp, for a few reasons.

First, "Elections Won" is clear and reasonably objective. Readers know right away what that means. By contrast, what does "Mandates" mean? Is it just a fancy word to mean "Elections Won"? Well, if that's what it means, why not just go with the unambiguous "Elections Won"? Frankly, if all "Mandates" means is "Elections Won" , then it's a Peacock word, a fancy word that sounds impressive. "Elections Won" is clear, and if that's all that's meant, then we should use it, not "Mandates".

But wait! Maybe "Mandates" means something other than "Eleection Won" so we should use it. Okay, but what does "Mandates" mean, then? Well, it's a term some politicians and political scientists use to show that a government has popular authority and legitimacy. A "popular mandate", if you will. Okay, but that's a somewhat subjective meaning. How can you tell that a politician or a government has a "mandate"? "Well," says the poli-scientist, "the people have shown their support - a mandate!" "How did the people show their support?", one asks. "At the polls!" says the poli-scientist. "They gave that leader and party the largest share of popular vote and a majority of seats in the Assembly!" "So, they won the election, then? Why not say 'Elections Won'?"

My point, then, is that if "Mandate" is just a fancy word for "Elections Won", it fails as both puffery and obscuring the objective fact of elections won. If it's something more than a fancy word for " Elections Won", we need to know what that is - to me, if it's something other than "Elections Won", it sounds subjective, which could intrude on NPOV, unless we have a clear definition. And finally, not everyone who reads Wikipedia articles will be familiar with the parliamentary system. Some may think "Mandate" has some special parliamentary meaning. Since it doesn't, that's another reason to use the neutral and clear term, "Elections Won" Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 20:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]