User talk:Evelyn Harthbrooke

Evelyn Harthbrooke (talk · contribs · count · logs · email)

Hi there. Welcome to my talk page, where you can leave me any questions or concerns you may have regarding any of my contributions or edits, and you can also have a little chat with me if desired. Please keep in mind though that while I do contribute to Wikipedia a lot, I may not have time to respond to you, so please be patient and I'll get to your questions/concerns/messages as soon as I am possibly able to.

Please don't add bolding to Canadian election articles

The fact it was in place for all the Canadian articles should have been a clue that it was a conscious choice by several of the Canadian editors who do a lot of work on the election articles to have it unbolded. The fact it's done elsewhere isn't the strong argument some people think it is, because it only appeared on Canadian federal elections after 2019, when the party with the most seats was different from the party with the highest popular vote, giving the appearance of partisan editing. Please revert your reversions. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 01:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi. Respectfully (and I mean this as nicely as possible), I am not going to revert something that will break precedent with other articles for the sake of not coming off as partisan. Nobody thinks that it comes off as partisan editing. It is clearly non-partisan. Also, I literally am a Canadian editor. I disagree with removing the bolding and I made my stance very clear on the discussion regarding it on the 2021 election talk page. The bolding has been there for years. Then all of a sudden its removed out of the blue? No. Unless a consensus is reached on a talk page, the bolding can't just be removed. It would break precedent with literally every single other Canadian election article.

The bolding stays per precedent and per the MOS on Canada-related articles. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 02:06, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

One more thing, the majority of the replies on the 2021 election talk page discussion are yours. You're the only one seemingly vehemently against bolding the results, while other people are for it, including me. It is there to signify with more oomph and prominence which party won the most votes or seats. That is the point of bolding, to increase prominence and to show importance. It has nothing at all to do with being partisan or non-partisan. You can disagree with something as much as you'd like, if there is more support for keeping them bolded, then there's more support for keeping them bolded. No matter how much you disagree with something or voice your opposition to something, you don't and can't override other people's support for it. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 02:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Final reply: it was NOT in place for all of the Canadian federal election results. It seems to have not been bolded on the articles covering the more recent elections, but that breaks consistency with other articles. Even UK election articles (including 2024 United Kingdom general election) have the results bolded for the winning party. The bolding stays, per several editors (including myself) disagreeing with its removal.

edit: So, I was wrong about the length the bolding has been there, it was a fairly recent addition to the articles (like a couple years ago), but my stance remains. It's better that the results be bolded to match other election articles, and the fact that it gives more prominence. - Evelyn Harthbrooke (leave a message · contributions) 02:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)