Talk:Party system: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Richard Jensen (getting to work) |
imported>Nick Gardner No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
::::Hmm, either we should rename this article to be focused on the USA or it needs to be restructured completely for the world. I say this because the separate headings mean nothing to me in comparative politics [this is because I know nothing about US politics, as well]. --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 07:13, 24 November 2007 (CST) | ::::Hmm, either we should rename this article to be focused on the USA or it needs to be restructured completely for the world. I say this because the separate headings mean nothing to me in comparative politics [this is because I know nothing about US politics, as well]. --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 07:13, 24 November 2007 (CST) | ||
::we have in place the outline for Canada and Japan, as well as a good bibliog for the rest of the world. Authors: start your wordprocessors! [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 08:42, 24 November 2007 (CST) | ::we have in place the outline for Canada and Japan, as well as a good bibliog for the rest of the world. Authors: start your wordprocessors! [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 08:42, 24 November 2007 (CST) | ||
Should there not be some material that is not country-specific? For example, what about the different political consequences of two-party, multi-party and dominant-party systems, the effect of proportional representation, Duverger's law and all that? Or should that be in another article? | |||
[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 09:11, 24 November 2007 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 09:11, 24 November 2007
all this text and bibliog is by RJensen
Is it complete? Its scope seems somewhat parochial. Nick Gardner 05:45, 24 November 2007 (CST)
- It's complete for the U.S. I would encourage more cosmopolitan scholars to cover the rest of the world. Richard Jensen 06:15, 24 November 2007 (CST)
- Hmm, either we should rename this article to be focused on the USA or it needs to be restructured completely for the world. I say this because the separate headings mean nothing to me in comparative politics [this is because I know nothing about US politics, as well]. --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 07:13, 24 November 2007 (CST)
- we have in place the outline for Canada and Japan, as well as a good bibliog for the rest of the world. Authors: start your wordprocessors! Richard Jensen 08:42, 24 November 2007 (CST)
- It's complete for the U.S. I would encourage more cosmopolitan scholars to cover the rest of the world. Richard Jensen 06:15, 24 November 2007 (CST)
Should there not be some material that is not country-specific? For example, what about the different political consequences of two-party, multi-party and dominant-party systems, the effect of proportional representation, Duverger's law and all that? Or should that be in another article? Nick Gardner 09:11, 24 November 2007 (CST)