File talk:2008primarycounties.png
Please can ou state the data sources of the map? --77.4.206.151 06:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
States without enough information...
[edit]
thumb This is concerning "(states will have all counties in the color of the winner until there is more precise information available)". I don't think we should have inaccurate information on this map. So, taking the lead from the democratic version, I think we should color the unavailable information in a dark grey.
Alternatively, we could have a mix of both these approaches and color the unknown counties in an alternate color for the winner of the whole state, indicating that the information is incomplete, similar to how Huckabee's win in Louisiana is a different color from the rest of his states since he didn't win any delegates. Either way, these maps should be consistent between both the Republican and Democratic versions. ~ PaulC/T+ 22:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- I think the uncommitted/unavailable color used in the Democrats' map makes the most sense. Coemgenus 14:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've uploaded a version of the map (at right) where unknowns are in the dark grey. In Kansas, not every county had its own caucus, so those counties are in dark grey. Coemgenus 16:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- I like the grey version better. 128.187.0.178 18:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've uploaded a version of the map (at right) where unknowns are in the dark grey. In Kansas, not every county had its own caucus, so those counties are in dark grey. Coemgenus 16:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Variations in color?
[edit]
What do the variations in color indicate? For example, the dark green county in Oklahoma or the various lightly shaded counties in Montana and a few in North Dakota? QQQQQQ 21:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
