Talk:2006 Peruvian general election

message: The article says that Sí Cumple didn't present any congressional list, but I was under the impression that the JNE ruled that the congressional ban on political participation by Fujimori extended to the entire Sí Cumple party, essentially voiding a Sí Cumple list.  Am I mistaken about this?  Also, if this is the case, did potential Sí Cumple congressional candidates jump over and join either Cambio-90 or Alianza Por El Futuro and get on the ballot that way? --Descendall 04:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have to check, but as I understand it, the ban is only on individuals. I'm sure I've seen a list, which probably contains people outside that party, which might be good to include in the article. About Congress candidates, the lists are presented around a month after the presidential candidates are registered, and the pro-Fujimori parties appear to be very tight, so their Congressional list(s) probably depended all along on the JNE's decision of whether to uphold the ban or not. I don't think you need to be a party member to be a candidate, so arrangement between lists doesn't seem to imply much effort. In any case, because of the 4% minimum for a party to be represented in Congress, it is clearly better for them to have just one of the parties (Alianza por el Futuro) present a list. Roughly the same candidates would have likely been included in a Sí Cumple list if Fujimori had been allowed to run. --Gabbec 17:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Here's the list of 27 people banned to run for office in this election. --Gabbec 22:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sí Cumple's congressional list 

message: The Ciro Gálvez article says that Gálvez withdrew from the election, but he's still listed as a current candidate here.  Does anyone know if this guy is still in the election? --Descendall 19:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I probably didn't make it very clear, but he quit only unofficially, i.e. he is no longer looking for people to vote for him but for Lourdes Flores instead (likely as the "lesser evil"), but he has not officially resigned. Apparently José Cardó has the same possition but he has presented a formal  resignation to the National Election Jury. However, there will be no changes to the ballot, with the election being so close. I put Cardó in the withdrawals section, but any votes he gets might end up being counted officially, so it might be better to put him back in the candidates section if this happens. I'll try to make both the Ciro Gálvez article and the Campaign Highlights entry in this article clearer. Thanks for the comment. --Gabbec 20:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, apparently Wong withdrew (for the 2nd time) and announced his support for Alan García, though I don't know yet if it is an official withdrawal. It won't affect the ballot either. --Gabbec 20:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what is taking these guys so long to withdraw.  It was pretty obvious that this was going to be a three-way election between Flores, Humala, and Garcia a long time ago.  You would think that the minor candidates would be able to withdraw before the deadline to be removed from the ballot.  If these candidates actually have asked their supporters to vote for someone else, we should probably make note of it here. --Descendall 01:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, Wong even participated in García's final rally, and the other two did publicly support Flores, so I guess those count as calls to vote for them. --Gabbec 02:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ciro Gálvez 

message: Perhaps we should delete the polls that are currently on the page and put up the exit and post-election polls. There are some available at El Comercio. --Descendall 01:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polls 

message: Candidates of Peruvian national election, 2006, any else thinks this should be merged back into the article?--Jersey Devil 09:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was having trouble seeing edits show up in the actual article, apparently from it getting too large, so I split it much like they did with the Spanish article. I think there is information (VP candidates, some number for Congress and Andean Parliament election) that is not included elsewhere, so I wouldn't delete it. If it can be merged back without it getting too large, or some other solution is proposed, I'm all for it.--Gabbec 10:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Candidates

message: Please see WP:RS for what are reliable sources. A certain user keeps adding to the external links section a link to his blog, this is not a reliable source and I will continue to remove it if added to the external links section.--Jersey Devil 20:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: External links are not sources.  Wikipedia:External links covers external links, and says that links to blogs should generally be avoided unless the article is about a blog or the blog is of particularly high quality.  I would note that we already do link to one blog on this page, but I think it is of particularly high quality. --Descendall 20:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links

message: I would like to use the images of the political parties for the Spanish Version as well; however, they're not in Wikimedia Commons which impeds me from using them. Could you please make it a wikimedia common image? Or let me know how I can use your images?
Thanks in advance.
:I uploaded them as "fair use" images, which applies to logos (see Wikipedia:Logos), but Wikimedia Commons requires images to be available under a free license, so I doubt that they can be uploaded there. Unfortunately, the Spanish Wikipedia doesn't allow fair use images either (es:Wikipedia:Votaciones/2004/Usar_s%C3%B3lo_im%C3%A1genes_libres), so I can't think of a solution unless there is some technicality I'm not aware of.--Gabbec 12:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So what should I do? Upload One by One again? By the way the page of the ONPE is the official one, however its not the most updated at times because I believe they dont give as much time to their website as to the counting of the votes. Peru.com has done a better job until now. -- (btw is there any way I can use the same login for both the spanish and english version of wikipedia?, I've got 2 different users it annoys me.)
Don't forget to sign your edits with ~~~~.--Jersey Devil 19:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: * Sale of alcohol was forbidden from the start of Friday April 7 until noon of Monday April 10. Fire arms could not be carried from Saturday April 8 until April 10, except for Members of the Armed Forces and the National Police, who could not, however, carry them while voting.
* Political gatherings were forbidden from April 7 until April 9, while public gatherings of any sort were prohibited during voting hours (8 am - 4 pm), including religious liturgies and entertainment shows. Clergy of any religion could not participate in their distinctive garments or habits.[21] Despite the election falling on an important date for the predominant Catholic community, such as Palm Sunday, the Archdiocese of Lima agreed not to hold liturgy from 8 am to 5 pm.
The two preceding paragraphs are not really highlights of this particular election, as they are both rather old laws concerning elections in Perú.  I moved them in here because by putting them in the "Highlights" section of this particular article makes it look like they are somehow related to this election in particular, which they are not.  Maybe someone can find a better place for them. Hdezela
I added them to Elections in Peru --Aidanb 16:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highlights 

message: Found of a video of the debate see here for video.--Jersey Devil 02:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Debate

message: I just removed a poll added by User IP 72.65.78.182. While it is good to have more information, this poll was done by Datum, while we are only keeping record of Apoyo polls. This is because all polls should correspond to the same methodology, to be able to compare between them, and getting polls from multiple companies would make each poll's context less clear and would clutter this section of the article. Apoyo seems to be the most reputable pollster, so I think we should stick with it. If someone wants to create a main article for opinion polls in this campaign, where all other polls can be included, you are more than welcome. There are such articles for other elections, such as this or this. For information on most polls during this campaign, this page has good records. In any case, it is illegal to publish polls in Peru after today, so there should not be many more.
:Um, I find this a bid pedantic. See, for instance, Mexican general election, 2006, where a variety of polls are consulted. Peru, even in contrast to Mexico, is a much narrower topic for an English language encyclopedia/site and yet a diversity of information is excluded. Whatever. I suppose the most important poll is coming soon. 72.65.78.182
I have to agree with the IP here Gabbec. So long as it is clarified who did the poll and the poll came from a reputable polling/media organization than I think it should be included. (You also forgot to sign your edit)--Jersey Devil 22:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry for not signing my previous edit. In any case, change it back if you think it's better; I never said that it shouldn't be included, I just think it should not be included in this article for the sake of clarity. One isolated poll with another methodology is out of context, and, again, it would be much better to create a main article with all the available polls we can gather, and link it from this article's section. I personally don't like the way polls are ordered either in the Mexican polls or in the main articles from Canada and the US that I linked in my previous comment, I would order them by pollster instead, I just think it's much more useful. The chart on the Canadian page is pretty neat, though.--Gabbec 23:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: OK, I created a main article for opinion polls and linked it from the section in this page. I gave up on ordering them by pollster because there are too few polls from some companies for any trend to be clear, and trends are actually pretty clear with all polls lumped together. In any case, I hope it's now clear why I didn't want to include one isolated poll before: if the scope was not narrowed to one pollster, everything should have gone there, and the amount of information would have been huge for a section in this article. Hopefully the new article is a good alternative for everyone. --Gabbec 01:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Opinion polls

message: I guess that, if we are having a section for the debate we should develop it more. Any thoughts as to what should be included? I would say the main points of each candidate and the response of the media and the public (according to a couple of polls in Lima, García won the debate, but I think I saw a national one giving Humala the victory). However, the two most memorable incidents in my ind were probably Humala arriving late (with García starting the debate on his own and saying that Humala stopped for a sandwich) and the flag removal, but I don't know if it's encyclopedia-worthy stuff. --Gabbec 18:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both events were frequently cited in the media (flag removal and Humala arriving late) so they definately should be on the section.--Jersey Devil 20:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Update on this, Humala just conceded defeat.--Jersey Devil 07:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Presidential Debate

message: Many sources say that one force leading to his victory was Hugo Chavez's support for his opponent.  
Under Wikipedia article "Hugo Chavez":
Between January and March of 2006, Chávez has made ample comments on the candidates of the 2006 Peruvian Presidential election, openly backing Ollanta Humala while referring to Alan García as a "thief" and a "crook" and considering Lourdes Flores a "candidate of the oligarchy". Chávez's comments have led the Peruvian government and the press to consider that he is persistently interfering in Peru's affairs in breach of international law. Both countries have recalled their ambassadors.[71][72] In a list compiled by the magazine New Statesman in 2006, he was voted eleventh in the list of "Heroes of our time"[73].
Is this true? Or are they just seeking economic freedom or other ideals?
A Peruvian magazine had this to say about Chavez:
right|75px
--Exander 04:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 1) Please don't make comments like "are they just seeking economic freedom or other ideals" not because I neccessarily disagree for any reason but because it makes you sound partisan and because Wikipedia is not a political forum. 2) Regarding your question I think that it is fair to say that Chavez' involvement had a negative effect on Humala. As a matter of fact it got to the point where Nadine Heridia (Humala's wife who was active in the campaigning) said that Chavez had a "loose mouth" despite the fact that she later said she did not mean to offend Chavez it was pretty clear that she saw some of his statements as negative to the campaign.   At one point, late in the election, Humala himself tried to reassure people that Chavez wasn't "threatening Peruvian soverignty" by saying that what Chavez said was "irrelevant" and that Peruvians were aware of this. --Jersey Devil 05:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Jersey Devil, Chávez just gave ammunition to García every time he spoke about the election, and García used it well and for several weeks. I'm pretty sure that the election would have been closer if Chávez had controlled himself. Union for Peru's spokesman Carlos Tapia even said that Chávez should "irse al carajo" for hurting Humala's chances, which any Spanish speaker would understand clearly (sorry to anyone offended by foul language). --Gabbec 05:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that POV, so I guess Chavez did affect the election, to his dismay. Should it be expanded further than it currently is?--Exander 06:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peru sticking it to Hugo Chavez? 

message: There really needs to be a map here showing the differences in the districts won by Humala and Garcia, it really explains the divide in Peru. Check out this sweet map by La Republica showing the districts won. I've never really made a map before so I'm not sure if I am the best to do this thing.--Jersey Devil 03:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, there are maps for each of the two rounds on the Spanish article, and they are on Wikipedia Commons, though their meaning could be clarified a bit. I don't have photoshop, but I might try to adapt them with some other program whenever I have time (weekend, probably), though you can do it if you want to. Another map for Congress would be nice too. But, yeah, this article would benefit greatly from those maps, and some more discussion of the results. --Gabbec 06:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: :Image:Garcia-Humala Screenshot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Garcia-Humala Screenshot.jpg

message: :Image:Frepap.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Frepap.png

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:22, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion