Talk:National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

Article review

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 04:40, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:51, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. Synth concerns expressed in an article tag. Z1720 (talk) 04:38, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Template:NPVIC chart needs a fix

NPVIC chart places the green text with the arrow, total in the wrong place, and it has several line breaks. I'm not sure how to fix it. perl_coder (talk) 09;54, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Perl coder: I’m not sure what you mean. The green arrow seems to be in the right place: at 222 EVs, a bit closer to 210 than to 240. Brainiac242 (talk) 10:29, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Brainiac242 It's correct on Safari on MacOS 26.3.1 (a), but the formatting is wrong on Chrome 147.0.7727.56 (arm64). perl_coder (talk) 10:37, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Perl coder: How about now? Brainiac242 (talk) 11:48, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

@Brainiac242 Awesome - looks great! Thanks. Perl coder (talk) 12:27, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

as-of date

@Anotheroneoutthere3 Please respect WP:BRD. I don't really know the history of the part of the page that has an HTML comment to not edit the date to be the current date, or the consensus here, but let's all use this section here to discuss that. As of now, consensus seems to be that the date should be updated only when there is an update. I don't know why the comment does not match this exactly - maybe there is an edge case in some module that requires the date to not be the current date. More likely, the comment does indeed mean "update the date only when there is an update", which was likely written following consensus. Blippy1998 (talk) 08:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Alright I'll stop Anotheroneoutthere3 (talk) 08:50, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

@Blippy1998: If you don’t know what the comment means, you can just ask the user who put it there. Brainiac242 (talk) 18:47, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

@Swpb: Brainiac242 (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it means "update the date only when there is an update", i.e. don't set it to automatically update. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 16:44, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Alright I won't Anotheroneoutthere3 (talk) 17:16, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

@Swpb: Why is the date of the chart supposed to be modified only after an update, while the date at the top of the infobox is modified every month? I’m not opposed to doing it either way, I’m just asking about the inconsistency. The infobox says “Status as of July 2026” and the chart says “History of adoption of the NPVIC as of June 2026”, while the latest action indicated in Bills in latest session was on April 2026? Brainiac242 (talk) 21:42, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Neither date should be automatically updated, as that would lead to inaccuracy if any events haven't been added to the article yet. That said, the infobox is generally manually updated much more frequently than the chart, since it shows active bills and not just adoptions. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 20:34, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

@Swpb: The latest action in any bill was in April. The infobox says “as of July 2026”. Brainiac242 (talk) 23:03, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Bills have died in committee since then. Blippy1998 (talk) 23:03, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Ok, so hopefully someone checked that nothing had changed when they updated the date to July. The point is just that whenever anyone updates the date, they need to be sure the map is accurate for that date, whether it has changed or not. So the date should just not be filled in by a template that always presents today's date. I'm not sure what the confusion here is or what you think needs changing. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 14:04, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@Swpb: If you look at this article’s history for the past two months, you’ll see there was a bit of an edit war, where one user kept trying to update the date of the chart, while several others reverted their edits, apparently because they thought your comment meant “the date should be updated only when there is an update”, i.e. when a new state joins the compact.

After reading your last response, I think that when you first commented here you misunderstood what was being discussed, and I misunderstood your misunderstanding. So, just to be clear, your comment on the chart is in no way a restriction on how often the date can be manually updated, but simply a request not to update it automatically through a template, correct? Brainiac242 (talk) 06:05, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Correct. Just don't update it through a template. You can obviously bump the date up if nothing has changed, as long as you've checked that nothing has changed. I thought that would be common sense, but I guess not. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 13:33, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Is there a quick way to find this or did you just dig through the history? Thanks for tagging them. Blippy1998 (talk) 04:25, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

I went through the revision history of this article and looked at ones from April 2023 (before Minnesota joined the compact) and February 2024 Anotheroneoutthere3 (talk) 16:17, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

In the View History tab, there is a list of links to external tools near the top. "Find addition/removal" takes you to a site where you can search for when a specific text string was added to or removed from an article. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 01:15, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

@Brainiac242 What's wrong with having the day of the month in the as-of date? Blippy1998 (talk) 02:38, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I think there’s consensus on the date format. The comment next to it specifically said “Year and month of latest update”. I only added the full date to keep it synced with the chart, and formatted the “as of” texts so they continued to show the “Year and month of latest update”. Brainiac242 (talk) 05:20, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Hmm... I wonder if that's true, and if so, I wonder why. I think we should use the specific date. What do you think? Blippy1998 (talk) 06:22, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Honestly, I’m used to the current format, and I don’t really see the need to be more specific than this. But I don’t really mind either way. I was just trying to respect the consensus. Brainiac242 (talk) 06:53, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I don't think the specific date adds any value; I think it should stay as month and year only. —swpb^{T • beyond • mutual} 16:06, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Very well; then I think the current version satisfies everyone's concerns, more or less. Thanks @Brainiac242 Blippy1998 (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2026 (UTC)