Talk:Schulze method

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Schulze method 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. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Do not attack other users For disputes, please see our guideline	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

An individual covered by or significantly related to this article has made non-trivial contributions to Wikipedia as MarkusSchulze (talk · contribs)

COI[change source]

There should, now, be no conflict of interest regarding this article. It was originally written by MarkusSchulze (talk · contribs) but was too complex for Simple English Wikipedia, and was a potential violation of COI, so was thus deleted by RFD discussion. I have, hopefully, educated myself on the method and written the article in simpler English and in a neutral tone. fr33kman ^talk 11:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestions[change source]

It should be added (1) that voters may skip preferences, but (2) that skipping preferences has no impact on the result of the elections, since only the order, in which the candidates are ranked, matters and not the absolute numbers of the preferences.

Okay, I forgot to add that, I'll do so later tonight. fr33kman ^talk 22:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The references should be removed. The reason: The references are too complicated for the typical reader of simple Wikipedia. I believe that a reader of simple Wikipedia, who wants to know more about the Schulze method, will automatically go to enWP and will find the needed information there.

Okay, I can understand that, but some citations are going to have to be included for WP:V. It's true that many will go to enWP, but we are a seperate project and the article has to stand on its own here without having to rely on enWP for verification. fr33kman ^talk 22:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The description of the Schulze method is not appropriate. The Schulze method is not an iterative method. It is a method where, for each pair of candidates A and B, a score p[A,B] - p[B,A] is calculated and where candidate A is better than candidate B if and only if this score is positive. I have moved an old version of the Schulze method article to my namespace.

Yeah, I was concerned about it sounding iterative; which I understand it it not (it's all done in one go). I'll fix that also. Please do work on the article in your userspace and then we can get together to chat about how the two should be combined. fr33kman ^talk 22:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way: Wikimedia uses the Schulze method to elect more than one candidate. The "better" relation, as defined above, is calculated and then the "best" candidates, according to this relation, are the winners.

Markus Schulze 21:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding so soon, I really want to get this article fit for simpleWP! :-) fr33kman ^talk 22:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]