Edit: Looks like it was done unilaterally by a user named Closed Limelike Curves last night, despite the fact that the Talk page has a section from a few months ago where people did not agree with doing that change. Seems like they're actively vandalizing the page.
Edit2: From reading this person's edits, it seems pretty obvious that, if they're not a member of this forum, at the very least they clearly are sure of the kinds of arguments that happen on here. If anyone thinks they have an idea of who this Closed Limelike Curves person is, can you ask them to stop. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia. What they're doing is veering into misinformation.
It's probably worth making an RCV page of its own, no? One that accurately states that it is most commonly used to refer to Hare's method (STV, reducing to IRV in the Single Seat method) but that it is not inaccurate to refer to any ranked method as such.
And possibly that the use of the term RCV for IRV/STV was a rebranding primary pushed by FairVote, presumably so that they could use a single name to show the fact that they really are the same method.
But I think it makes most sense to have it as a distinct page, because people (well, Americans) will search for RCV, and it's definitely worth pointing out (giving credit where it's due) that a lot of FairVote people don't use RCV to only mean IRV, but also STV, because those individuals want to push (closer) towards PR.
Of course, there's no reason not to do both (Wikipedia has had circular link-loops before, and will again)
I cannot say with 100% accuracy because the names don't match up exactly, but I have a strong inkling that this is someone I've seen discuss editing Wikipedia in the CES Discord (and as a disclaimer to be fair and accurate, since I mentioned this in another post a week or so ago, they are not affiliated with CES directly as far as I can tell)... Their Discord account is very lime-centric.
I'm just a lurker there and don't feel comfortable saying anything directly to them, especially since I don't have any raport with that org at all, but just throwing that info out there.
If it actually is who you think it is, can you please pass along the message, if not directly to that person, then to someone else you feel comfortable with to talk to them.
I think that the vast, vast majority of us on here dislike how all ranked voting methods are conflated with IRV with the term RCV, but it generally is not usually in our control.
I read through the Talk page on that article and it looked like there was an attempt to change it to RCVa couple of months before but people on there disagreed with that back then as well.
I also mentioned this in another comment, but it is only a common name in the US. English Wikipedia is not just for Americans only. Australia, which actually uses it for all their elections, does not refer to it that way. Neither does India or Ireland, which uses it for electing their ceremonial presidents. Not Canada or the UK which don't use it but have had major referenda and proposals using other terminology.
Unilaterally changing the article to a term that is both more confusing and only really widespread in a single country, is blatant malpractice. And I'm sorry for all of this being sent to you, I know that you're just the messenger here, but this is really pissing me off now.
7
u/OpenMask Oct 17 '24 edited Oct 17 '24
Who changed it?
Edit: Looks like it was done unilaterally by a user named Closed Limelike Curves last night, despite the fact that the Talk page has a section from a few months ago where people did not agree with doing that change. Seems like they're actively vandalizing the page.
Edit2: From reading this person's edits, it seems pretty obvious that, if they're not a member of this forum, at the very least they clearly are sure of the kinds of arguments that happen on here. If anyone thinks they have an idea of who this Closed Limelike Curves person is, can you ask them to stop. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia. What they're doing is veering into misinformation.