Talk:2020 Belarusian presidential election

	Belarus portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belarus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Merge Proposal

Support I propose the merger because I do not believe the article on Hienadz Shutau satisfies WP:BLP1E, but once Draft:Hienadz_Shutau is merged, would have sufficient information to be helpful to this article, possibly under the deaths section. Halfadaniel (talk) 17:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to 2020–2021 Belarusian protests instead, he died in the protests, not the election. I agree regarding WP:BLP1E ― Tartan357 ^Talk 06:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: good start.

North8000 (talk) 00:43, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edits by user Itsmeant

I am a bit concerned about the impartiality of the edit made by the 6-days-old account Itsmeant, some of which seem to be impartial, based on some vague interpretation of "vandalism" or just without clear context. See here and here. Any other thoughts? Ivario (talk) 10:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

response to Ivario I'm not sure if you are concerned more about my edits or the date duration of my account? Anybody can start contributing since day 1 here. please be specific about vandalism.Itsmeant (talk) 04:17, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Itsmeant has deleted on 1 August the internet polls conducted by government parties which showed a very different poll results to the non-government polls the reason give:- remove information about government sponsored polls as the cite was referred to the twitter url. Ânes-pur-sàng wiki 12:00, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ivario The reason for deletion polls was the cite that it was reffered to, I don't really think it's acceptable to post something from twitter. Truthful source must be provided. Itsmeant (talk) 04:14, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but it may have been wiser to leave the data in place and flag it with a message that a better citation was needed, as it is a active ongoing page which would give others the opportunity to improve the item rather than expect them to recreate it after it was deleted without warning. Ânes-pur-sàng wiki 12:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ânes-pur-sàng Thank you for provided feedback, I will restore some data later today. Regards Itsmeant (talk) 02:09, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Сьвятлана Ціханоўская(2020).png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a number of polls quoted in the article, but their validity is highly questionable. A poll is supposed to be conducted by randomly selecting respondents, yet the polls quoted are based on voluntary contributions, possibly of aggrieved Belarusians. I am not sure how much value can be attached to such polls. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.121.197.97 (talk) 00:14, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Process of nomination & registration

Nevermind, found the answer to my questions, here: http://www.rec.gov.by/sites/default/files/pdf/about_PRB_eng.pdf

So, to even begin the nomination process for president you must first have an initiative group of at least 100 persons, and this seems to be true for both party candidates and independent candidates without a political party. Then the Central Commission decides on your qualifications. If you make it past that step, then the next step is to collect at least 100,000 valid signatures. Seems like a pretty steep requirement for a country with the population of Belarus. In any case, I will try and add this information to either this article, the general article for the President of Belarus, or both. --Criticalthinker (talk) 07:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:53, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

I see users insisting on keeping the infobox's ongoing parameter as "yes", even though the election has finished. I presume this is due to the disputed results, however the infobox should reflect the official results, even if they are falsified, and this is the case with other articles with disputed results and allegations of vote rigging (for example Venezuela's), including all the Belarusian presidential election articles. As the lead states, Lukashenko was re-elected for his 6th term, whether or not it was legitimate so it is misleading to give the idea that the election is not compete because it is. It also makes no sense to not show the official results but include the officially reported final turnout in the infobox, and also include the official results in the results section. If for some reason the election should be marked as ongoing, explain below please. Mellk (talk) 10:48, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And to add, if somehow the CEC declares the results to be annulled after declaring it to be legitimate, this can still be later reflected. For example with September 2018 Primorsky Krai gubernatorial election. Mellk (talk) 10:59, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should be set to "no". I wondered why it changed after I changed as per usual. Number 5 7 19:53, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tedm03, please explain why you changed this, your edit summary is blank. Mellk (talk) 20:19, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because we don't know what the outcome of the protests and everything will be. The results clearly aren't what the CEC says they are and Wikipedia should have a neutral position on the matter. We should wait until the protest situation is sorted out. Tedm03 (talk) 20:22, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I've already said, the election has concluded. The protests does not mean the election is still going on. Officially, Lukashenko has been re-elected. It does not matter whether it or not the election was rigged or not, the infobox shows the official results, it is not an endorsement of the official results. Every Belarusian election after 1994 hasn't been democratic, this one is no different. If things change, then changes to the article will be made, it's not something to just wait. Mellk (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is something to just wait. Wikipedia should not be endorsing a side by showing the "official" results. By claiming that the CEC numbers are the results we are endorsing one side. Tedm03 (talk) 20:36, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not an endorsement. The article clearly includes the controversies with this election. This is no different to other election articles. The 2018 Venezuelan presidential election for example is also disputed, but the official results are displayed in the infobox. This is the same case with all elections in historical totalitarian regimes like Nazi Germany and the Stalinist Soviet Union and modern ones like North Korea. These are obviously show elections, but this is already clear in the article. The "ongoing" parameter is specifically for if the election is ongoing, in which this one isn't. Mellk (talk) 20:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All the elections you mention are long over. This election happened a couple days ago. We should wait until the immediate aftermath is over. There are still massive protests going on.] and the international community is pressuring the regime. Tedm03 (talk) 20:53, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is no different with recent elections or votes. The 2020 Russian constitutional referendum had the official results in the infobox almost immediately after the results were released, despite allegations of widespread fraud which were clearly mentioned in the article itself. Even if the election results are annulled, the results for this particular election won't change, it'll just be invalidated and a new election would be held (and therefore a new article, like September 2018 Primorsky Krai gubernatorial election and December 2018 Primorsky Krai gubernatorial election). This is just how these election articles work, feelings are irrelevant, you're using the parameter incorrectly when the election has finished. Mellk (talk) 21:02, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The election itself is over and official results have been announced, disputed by the opposition though they may be. If the country's electoral authorities side with the opposition and void the results of the election that would only mean that a new election would be held, the results of this one wouldn't be modified. The opposition's filings call for the election itself to be annulled and rerun, not to have a certain portion of the ballots recounted. This means even the opposition considers this election to be over, they simply disagree with the results and claim that they are unfair. Goodposts (talk) 23:35, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quite many users above completely misunderstand/misinterpret WP policies by claiming that the results are "official". That claim is relevant only if we consider Lukashenka's electoral commission WP:RS. That is a dubious claim, to say the least. WP is under no obligation whatsoever to consider the official count valid; quite the contrary, it takes a considerable stretch of WP policies to consider these results correct. The onus is on those who want to include them to construct an argument for them (and not just the nonsensical WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument repeated above. Jeppiz (talk) 17:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The results are official because they come from the government; the election commission is an appropriate primary source for those results. No claim is being made that the official results are just or reflective of the votes that were cast. The government's official policy has always been to release rigged results; they did this in 2015 and they did it again now. But they are still the official results because the very definition of "official" is coming from the organization legally responsible for tallying and reporting the results. The article makes it abundantly clear that the election was neither free nor fair based on coverage in reliable secondary sources. The official results are always notable in an election article regardless of how fair they're considered by secondary sources, simply because they are the official results. You've said we're stating that the results are "valid" and "correct", which is untrue. Nowhere is anything to that effect stated in the article. You're simply taking issue with the official results being displayed in the article. That is an inappropriate use of the POV tag; the results, taken alone, do not express a non-neutral editorial point of view. They are objectively the official results. It is not an WP:OTHERSTUFF argument to invoke the consensus that exists on every other election article on Wikipedia, which is undoubtedly applicable here. — Tartan357 ^(Talk) 19:18, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We disagree on the above. There is no WP policy, to the best of my knowledge, stating that we must use the official results of an election. It is usually the normal thing to do, but normally elections are not rigged. When we know that virtually all RS say that these are not the correct results, I don't see any WP policy supporting us reporting them as results. Jeppiz (talk) 22:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a nonsensical argument. Wikipedia policies do not state what content should or should not be included. We've included the official election results because this is an article about an election. None of the content in the body of the article endorses these results. As others have pointed out above, we always include official results regardless of fairness. See 2019 North Korean parliamentary election and 2018 Venezuelan presidential election for examples of this. — Tartan357 ^(Talk) 22:36, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Source Noticeboard RfC

Hi there! I've posted an RfC on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard concerning the open-access based polls. Since these types of polls feature prominently on this page, I'm adding this here to inform other editors. If you wish to provide your opinion on the matter, you're free to do so as the discussion is still ongoing. It can be found in the RS noticeboard. Best regards, Goodposts (talk) 23:39, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the President of Belarus now? Samogitia (talk) 06:41, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure you're asking that in the wrong section of this talk page. Goodposts (talk) 12:58, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The situation on the ground.

From last night's news broadcast, the situation in Belarus seems much more fraught than this article suggests. Is this because Wikipedia is "Not News" or for some other reason? Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 16:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that the content you're looking for is being added to 2020 Belarusian protests primarily, instead of here. — Tartan357 ^(Talk) 04:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who's the President of Belarus now?--Samogitia (talk) 21:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's no "true" answer right now - historians will analyse this timeline in the future based on sources. Right now Lukashenko thinks he's president and has control of military/police but has lost control of the streets and factories and public opinion. Most Belarusians think he's not president and want him to hand over political/military/police power. For international state opinions, see international opinion pro-Lukashenko and international opinion anti-Lukashenko. Boud (talk) 02:40, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

POV-pushing

It is starting to get a bit annoying with these POV-pushers who continue to violate all WP-policies to push their own agenda. The obvious NPOV here is that the results are disputed. Virtually all good reliable sources say the results are rigged. For WP to claim the falsified results are factual is both contrary to NPOV and RS. What is more, the same POV-pushers now even remove tags (in another breach of WP policies). The aim of these POV-pushers is clear: trying to create the illusion that the rigged results are somehow official. However, WP goes by sources, and as long as all RS describe the results as contested, that's what the article should say. Jeppiz (talk) 21:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to this argument above in detail. You have decided to ignore it and are now accusing me and others of willfully violating policy and POV-pushing. This is a content dispute. If you actually read my reply to your above comment, you'd know that I, just like others in that discussion, am NOT endorsing the official results. We aren't going to pretend, however, that the election was fair when it wasn't. You are making some very serious personal attacks here and I'll take you to ANI if you keep it up. — Tartan357 ^(Talk) 22:07, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not ignoring your answer, but I am not in the least convinced by it. Those are two entirely separate things. Presenting the results as the official ones would require us to consider the Belarusian Electoral commission as the reliable source, more so than any other. I do not find any support for that in WP policies, nor have I seen you or anyone else provide anything beyond WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS to support your insistance on this. Repeatedly removing not only edits but even any tag to alert readers to the content dispute looks like a prime case of WP:OWN and threatening with ANI on top of that further strengthens that impression. Jeppiz (talk) 22:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are the official results. It's as simple as that. They are unfair, but are official. The electoral commission is being used as a primary source solely for the official results. The article's text is based on secondary coverage in reliable sources, and makes it abundantly clear that the election was unfair. That is my argument, and it is not WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I also addressed your WP:OTHERSTUFF claim; you are essentially using that argument to reject the concept of WP:CONSENSUS. We're not talking about a few cherry-picked examples. We've always included official results in election articles regardless of fairness. You are not articulating what text specifically constitutes a POV problem, and are ignoring present consensus. Per Template:POV/doc#When to remove, the template should be removed. And now you're casting even broader WP:ASPERSIONS by accusing me of WP:OWN, despite me having made only 7 edits to the article. These are personal attacks and are exactly what WP:ANI is for. — Tartan357 ^(Talk) 22:34, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an agency that verifies and/or corrects election results. The listed results are the official results, as per the country's electoral authorities. This does not imply that they have been checked or verified by wikipedia, merely that those are the official results the election authorities put forward. The article mentions numerous times that the opposition does not consider the elections to be fair and that they have issued formal protests to that effect. It also explicitly lists countries that have both endorsed and raised concerns over conduct of the election. Goodposts (talk) 23:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There have been many similar claims of election fraud in non-Western countries in the 21st century. One I can think of is the 2009 Iranian presidential election, whose official results brought about large protests and an ensuing crackdown. The Wikipedia article reported the official results, stressing they were from the government, but also mentioned other alleged results. In fact there was another article about the results controversy. But in any case, official results are needed to comprehend what's going on. They can be used for the opposition's own argument, as there are statistical methods to prove an election fraud, such as the Benford's law (or so it seems, I'm not a statistician). So far, we know that Lukashenko lost in quite a number of polling stations in the capital and other socially-oriented environments (consulates), but we need more than just two sources. Kahlores (talk) 03:31, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Results

The Official Website for the 2020 Elections is down, or at least non-accessible to me. Is there any way we can gain access to the officially published results? especially those at the lower levels? Kahlores (talk) 02:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Registered candidates

Stop messing with the fact I added about how a candidate first registers. To register as a candidate, you have to first have an iniative group of 100 people. Then you must be cleared to collect the 100,000 signatures to be officially NOMINATED. The fact I added is clearly connected to the registration process. If you'd like to add the requirements for the nomination process further down that section, feel free. --Criticalthinker (talk) 03:31, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion polls

More confusion on this page. In the opinion polls section, it literally says:

"Opinion polling in Belarus requires a government license. Media outlets are also banned from conducting online polls regarding the election."

And the goes on to list a handful of internet polls by media outlets. Are internet polls banned or not? Were these polls done unlawfully? This needs explanation in the section if you're going to keep this line in the article. --Criticalthinker (talk) 12:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What is even more remarkable is the big differences in figures. Look at the polls of Onliner.by and Svaboda.org of 26 May: Babaryka's support differs by 24 %-points, Tsikhanouski/Tsikhanouskaya's by 39 %-points. How were these polls conducted? At least either must have been a total fiasco method-wise. Untill I get evidence to the contrary, I believe the poll's were conducted among their own user base, saying nothing about opinions in the larger population.

Such a table cannot be kept.

–LPfi (talk) 11:19, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]