Jump to content

Talk:Schulze method

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WildGardener (talk | contribs) at 00:48, 10 December 2020 (Local Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Former featured article candidateSchulze method is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 4, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
WikiProject iconElections and Referendums B‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconPolitics B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Condorcet method/wiki/Schulze method" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Condorcet method/wiki/Schulze method. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC678 02:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Local Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives

Since LIIA is one of the few criteria where Schulze and ranked pairs differ, should the article give an example where Schulze fails it or link to an external reference? WildGardener (talk) 01:22, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In this example, the Schulze ranking is C > D > B > A. However, when candidate C is removed, then the Schulze ranking of the remaining candidates is D > A > B.
I had added this example in 2009 (diff). However, this example was removed by Daveagp in 2011 (diff). I didn't reinsert this example because I didn't want to be accused of starting an edit war. Markus Schulze 07:52, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the background! I didn't realize there was past history on this already. WildGardener (talk) 00:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]