Talk:Joe Biden wins 2020 South Carolina US Democratic presidential primary

Notes

• Delegate breakdown for nevada comes from https://edition.cnn.com/election/2020/state/nevada, for South Carolina comes from https://www.wltx.com/article/news/politics/south-carolina-primary-results-live-analysis/101-8cfd3c93-7acc-44ff-a0e8-c8ed4e5cf79a, and prior delegate counts come from the earlier article cited as a source
• General faq about delegates can be found at the same CNN source under "Delegate 101", including that 1,991 are needed
• If needed, National Conference of State Legislatures source is https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/2020-state-primary-election-dates.aspx, which was included in prior articles. I'm not sure if it should be included here as well, but if it should be, I have included a citation below that can be copied over
• While the order of states for super tuesday is the same as the order listed in the source used (https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/what-is-super-tuesday), as a list of proper nouns presented in alphabetical order there isn't much there that can be copyrighted, so not an infringement

--DannyS712 (talk) 08:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

*{{source
|url    = https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/2020-state-primary-election-dates.aspx
|title  = 2020 State Primary Election Dates
|author = 
|pub    = National Conference of State Legislatures
|date   = October 15, 2019
}}

Btw, I am unable to access any "Delegate 101" on the CNN source page; if I access that page on a browser that runs its javascript, I'm unable to access the page at all, and if I access it on a browser with its javascript disabled, "Delegate 101" appears as a string but isn't clickable and has no information attached to it. --Pi zero (talk) 21:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

In that case, I think the only thing I sourced from it (the Delegate 101 section) was the total number needed. It may already be in another source, but better to just remove it entirely if needed --DannyS712 (talk) 22:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind, USA today includes the 1991 are needed: "On Tuesday, 14 states will determine one-third of the pledged delegates – 1,344 out of the 1,991 needed to win the nomination..." (underline added) --DannyS712 (talk) 22:35, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Review of revision 4549253 [Not ready]

Revision 4549253 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 14:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: This needs to mention that Buttigieg dropped out. It doesn't have to be a big deal, but it needs to be said (and therefore it needs to be sourced). Obviously we need to move fast on this; so even after not-ready'ing this, I'm going to keep reviewing it for everything else about the article. I hope to clear everything about the article except that, and then once that is fixed I can review and publish it quickly. [there was a glitch in the "pre-review"; see below] @DannyS712: Sure enough. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 4549253 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 14:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: This needs to mention that Buttigieg dropped out. It doesn't have to be a big deal, but it needs to be said (and therefore it needs to be sourced). Obviously we need to move fast on this; so even after not-ready'ing this, I'm going to keep reviewing it for everything else about the article. I hope to clear everything about the article except that, and then once that is fixed I can review and publish it quickly. [there was a glitch in the "pre-review"; see below] @DannyS712: Sure enough. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

• Two-part problem with SC delegate counts.

• The numbers of SC delegates given here are not consistent with those now in the source.
• The source (well, the second page it sends you do for details) says the SC delegates won't be "officially" awarded until... I think it was May 31. It seems advisable to make some remark about that here; likely doesn't have to be long-winded, but seemingly it isn't quite true to say that so-and-so secured such-and-such-number of the states pledged delegates.

I'm suspending my pre-review for now, since any change in the SC delegate numbers would then propagate through to other numbers, making it harder to keep track during pre-review.

--Pi zero (talk) 15:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what second page you're looking at - I scrolled down to "South Carolina Primary Pledged Delegates" on the page. I'll update it with the new numbers --DannyS712 (talk) 17:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, Klobuchar just dropped out. If this was already published, I would write that separately, but since it isn't, I've updated. --DannyS712 (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Review of revision 4549344 [Passed]

Revision 4549344 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: It's too easy to do that [accidentally not-readying the article]; something to fix in the interface when replacing the old review gadget. I'm slightly uncomfortable with the sourcing of the delegate counts. I suspect they adjusted those delegate counts later, and I'm not sure where those counts actually come from. See also my earlier remarks on the meaning of the delegate counts. Although I'm allowing the "Biden won" description in the lede, imo we'd do well to get out of the habit of saying in the lede merely that somebody "won" in these contests that aren't winner-take-all for the delegates. Though it wouldn't be appropriate to weigh down the lede with all the details, we could provide a slightly more informative/nuanced lede summary for our readers. I'm allowing the total number of delegates needed, which is in fact pretty well documented "out there" (but as noted above, I wasn't able to access it through the recommended source). The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4549344 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: It's too easy to do that [accidentally not-readying the article]; something to fix in the interface when replacing the old review gadget. I'm slightly uncomfortable with the sourcing of the delegate counts. I suspect they adjusted those delegate counts later, and I'm not sure where those counts actually come from. See also my earlier remarks on the meaning of the delegate counts. Although I'm allowing the "Biden won" description in the lede, imo we'd do well to get out of the habit of saying in the lede merely that somebody "won" in these contests that aren't winner-take-all for the delegates. Though it wouldn't be appropriate to weigh down the lede with all the details, we could provide a slightly more informative/nuanced lede summary for our readers. I'm allowing the total number of delegates needed, which is in fact pretty well documented "out there" (but as noted above, I wasn't able to access it through the recommended source). The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.