| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Super Tuesday article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened:
|
 | A news item involving Super Tuesday was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 3 March 2004. |  |
At the end of the article, someone added info on an Aswin Sindar (sp?). Looks like graffiti to me.
under 2008, that should say in the Spring of 2007 right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.211.115 (talk) 19:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The author is not aware the mortgage industry also has a "Super Tuesday" in which many States have court-approved Tuesdays on which a foreclosure sale is allowed to occur. Somebody close to the mortgage industry should compile this as a separate article. I do not have enough requisite knowledge.
--Greg
No one is calling Feb 5 "Giga Tuesday." The article referenced by the author is apparently the only news organization to call it such. Terms like "Mega Tuesday" and "Super Duper Tuesday" are much more common. If no one objects, I am going to remove the reference to Giga Tuesday, and fix the reference to something that is both more mainstream and which perhaps even discusses the name itself. Brash 19:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
States could not have decided in Spring of 2008 to change their primaries to February of 2008. Most states made the change in Spring of 2007.
216.87.243.7 (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC) Dan[reply]
I have only heard the term "Super Tuesday" used in the media to refer to the upcoming Feb 5th 2008 primary. Are there any contemporary sources for the term "Super Duper Tuesday"? Perhaps the articles should either be combined into "Super Tuesday" or "Super Duper Tuesday" moved to "Super Tuesday (2008)" -- Macduff (talk) 16:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A republican delegate graph should be added--if one exists. Brahim 20:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am removing the graph for the following reasons:
1. It is simply incorrect in regards to the numbers and proportions of delegates for each candidate. 2. The bar graphs are imprecise. 3. Standings are likely to change often. 4. The expression of erroneus poll results in an objective medium like Wikipedia is likely to affect a viewers perspective of the candidates, this can have an effect on the nomination of said canditates, and as such does not consitute neutral information.
-D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.104.234.21 (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Super Tuesday appears in over 3000 news stories (via Google News [1]); Super Duper Tuesday appears in only about 500 [2]. They refer to the same event, which is why I am recommending they be merged. Kallahan (talk) 00:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Article talks about several different Tuesdays, some in Feb, some in March, and isn't very clear (throughout the article) as to which are which.
Also, there are no totals, to give readers an idea of how these dates have snowballed in importance over the last couple decades. It appears (from the article) that:
2008-02-04 == 24 states
2004-02-03 == 5 states - according to this article, in different wiki article* they claim 7 states (which is it?)
2004-03-02 == 10 states (democratic mostly?) - CNN was calling this Super Tuesday
-2, poorly written and boo on locking it. ~ender - 2008-02-05 11:12:AM MST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.240.27.45 (talk • contribs) 13:06, 5 February 2008
"This article is about the primary day" is only useful if you already know what a "primary" is, in which case you probably already know what Super Tuesday is likely to mean. So that sentence is not helpful.
Instead, how about "This article is about a significant day in the United States presidential primary process" ? - 198.144.208.11 (talk) 22:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This portion was found at the end of this entry as of 5 Feb 2008 5:30 AM GMT:
Indeed, Ashwin Sundar will be the Republican and Democratic nominations in this year's elections, making him the first candidate in US history to win the White House as both a Republican and Democrat. Heil Ashwin.[5]
Vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.17.223 (talk) 05:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are the Democrats' primaries always proportional, or are there any exceptions where the winner gets all the delegates in a state? Vints (talk) 19:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A brief article with a lot of good facts on Super Tuesday is here: [3] . Some notes: the term ST was first used in the New York Times in 1976 to describe a multi-primary event on the same date. Also the number of states has fluctuated, not gradually risen. More states voted on this day in 1988 than in any other year except for 2008. Chronicler3 (talk) 23:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's almost here! shouldn't there be a separate article?Ericl (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good suggestion! Looks like someone did some good work: Super_Tuesday,_2012. Truly, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 03:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There was no info about next Super Tuesday whatsoever. Today I added list of states participating, together with source because that is really the minimum of information. Someone more experienced in wiki editing can put these states in table - it is more visually appealing. And maybe some further info. How many delegates? What percentage of delegates will be allotted at ST 2016? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.29.212.250 (talk) 10:56, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I changed the chronology in order to benefit readers searching for info on Super Tuesday and what it means in the elections. Wikipedical came along and flipped it back without giving any reason. As far as I'm aware, there's no hard and fast WP rule that says the oldest must come first. Most readers coming to the page for the first time are looking for current information. As per the complaint of the IP above. With the newest first, the article reads much better. If the reader wants to get into the long history of Super Tuesday that information is there. But for those who want info on the current cycle, that is there up front and easy to see. It will draw the reader into the article more effectively than the oldest first, imho, so I reverted the change. SW3 5DL (talk) 17:29, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just a heads up for anyone wondering why the Super Tuesday 2016 map says "Purple" in the caption, when those states colored purple actually appear to be colored blue:
The user who made the current map image clearly meant to color those "blue" states in the map purple, as indicated by the file page description, but for whatever reason that user chose a shade of purple that's extremely easy to confuse with blue. I made an altered map with a more distinct shade of purple, but apparently Wikipedia up and changed how image uploading works on me. There's no option for me to upload a new version of the map anymore, and when I attempted to upload a separate, new file, I got scared I'd be banned for uploading an image which I copied and altered. Even though the license on the original file says I can do that, there's no license in this new "upload wizard" that allows for one user altering and uploading different versions of the works of another user even when that user says it's okay. The whole thing was confusing, and I don't want to risk getting banned on a technicality.
If anyone can upload a new version of the map with a proper purple shade in it that won't get them banned, please do so. Thanks.Joshbunk (talk) 02:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry everybody. I made the map. I actually have trouble seeing blue. I thought I had actually made it purple. Jp16103 18:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
lmao — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.27.245.27 (talk) 15:48, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Super Tuesday. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:28, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There’s a map of 2016 super Tuesday states. Why isn’t there a map of 2020 super Tuesday states? Skysong263 (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This comment's relevance to primary timing needs to be spelled out better: " . . . (following the chaotic 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago)". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dogru144 (talk • contribs) 09:00, March 2, 2020 (UTC)
With the 2019–20 COVID-19 pandemic, eleven primaries have been moved back to June 2. Since there are almost as many primaries on this day as there were on the first Super Tuesday, should we add something about this second Super Tuesday? Thegayfrenchbullie123 (talk) 9:29 PM, April 3, 2020 (EST)
