Jump to content

Talk:2009–10 Chilean general election

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Far-left

[edit]

"far-left" to describe Junto Podemos Mas can be considered pejorative. In Chilean political discourse the neutral term used is most often "extra-parliamentary left". The latter is used both by the parties of the left outside the CPD coalition and by officialist sources.

That sounds reasonable, so far Juntos Podemos Mas has not tried to depose the goverment (nor does it seems it's in their agenda to ever do so). Although "extra-parliamentary left" is a term used only in Chile to avoid being pejorative, the term makes little sense outside of Chile.--142.68.45.126 (talk) 23:48, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Piñera photo

[edit]
(The following discussion was moved from User talk:B1mbo.)

Estimado, B1mbo, la foto que sigues poniendo de Piñera es estéticamente inadecuada para el artículo en cuestión, te lo he dicho ya en innumerables oportunidades. Por favor no insistas. Pristino (talk) 03:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, there are no rules supporting what you're doing. Using professional and official photoshoots is the recomended thing instead of an amateur, blurred and moved image. WP:IMAGE says clearly: Poor quality images (too dark, blurry, etc.) or where the subject in the image is too small, hidden in clutter, ambiguous or otherwise not obvious, should not be used. Instead, you're boycotting Wikipedia changing the things in all the other languages and uploading a copy of the image even after the image was protected. --B1mbo (talk) 05:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The photo is neither dark nor blurry. Please stop changing the photo as you will inevitably get the article blocked just in time for the election, which will frustrate us both. As you have done most of the editing on the Spanish version and have barely touched the English version, it would seem that it is you who is trying to boycott this article by coming here and constantly changing the photo but contributing nothing else to the article. You should have noticed by now that I haven't gone to the Spanish-language version of the article to constantly change the photo of Piñera the way you have here. Do you want to call for a third opinion here? Pristino (talk) 00:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion

[edit]

Can you move this discssion to the talk page of the page? Agreements on thing that have turned into an edit "conflict" should be developed in the talk page of the article not as private 1-1 agreements. Dentren | Talk 01:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea :) Pristino (talk) 01:25, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Continuation of discussion

[edit]

Let me be conside I see it as following:

  • Bimbo image: good quality but from an aestetic point of view is doen not fit well in the article because it does not focus the face.
  • Pristino image: good focus but the image is not the most favourable or beutiful of Piñera, all the candidates should to have some pictures amoung their nicest ones (see Freis photo hes laughting, how rare is that!).
Conclusion- 1) agree on one of these or 2) find a better image or 3) continue warrying and get the page blocked with a 50-50% chance for your prefered image to bee in the blocked version. No dubt pption 2 is the best one. Dentren | Talk 03:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I confused
with
now its clear for me that the 1 one "Piñera crop.jpg" is more favourable to mr Piñera than the thirth image (below) and does "fit" with the other candidate images.
Dentren | Talk 03:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before, Piñera's image is the official picture of his campaign. Would you change, for example, File:Official_portrait_of_Barack_Obama.jpg for File:Obama Rally in Pittsburgh 2008.3.28.jpg in Barack Obama article just because someone said you have to look in a particular way? I don't see why the look of Piñera is so important, especially when two other candidates aren't looking straignt (not in the angle of Piñera but in any case, not straight). It's just a matter of common sense and an application of WP:IMAGE; the image of Piñera looking straight isn't bad when you have no other picture but in this case, certainly isn't the best option. --B1mbo (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2009 (UTC) PD: Besides, Piñera looking to Frei and Frei looking to Piñera is a very interesting composition of images :P[reply]

I've looked all over (Flickr, Google Images, PIñera's official website) for a recent, good quality color photo of Piñera smiling at the camera, but all of the good photos are either low quality (small size) or under a license incompatible with Wikimedia Commons. I think the Image:File:Piñera crop.jpg photo is superior for the sole reason that it shows a clear, unobstructed view of Piñera's face. The campaign photo might be of a higher quality but it only partially shows his face. Until we find a better photo I think this is the best we have right now. Pristino (talk) 04:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the idea of showing the full face of the candidates? None of the other three are showing it, just Piñera in your picture. The campaign photo doesn't show all the face... so what. It's clearly more important the quality of the picture instead some kind of rule that you invented... of course, if it's looking to somewhere else and the pic shows just one ear and half of the eye, it's not a good picture... but here shows almost all his face and as far as I know, his face is very symmetric so we are not hiding something really important in the ¿5% of the face not being shown?.
At this moment, I understand than Dentren is also supporting the campaign picture... and of course, Pristino is supporting his picture. --B1mbo (talk) 13:02, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion: I agree with both B1mbo and Dentren. The reason I do is based on the following process of thought:

  • 1. Piñera is a living person, therefore he falls under Wiki's rather new living people policy.
  • 2. Both images look good and both images are copyright good. Attempting to say one is "better looking" than the other is a pointless argument.
  • 3. Since both pictures are acceptable, we must decide which to use based on the living people policy (not sure if that's the exact name).
  • 4. Piñera, as a living person, should have the usage of his official picture in the article.
  • 5. The image presented by B1mbo and Dentren is the official picture.
  • 6. Therefore, that is the image that should be in the article.

If the argument continues, and after having established a discussion and gathered consensus, this should be reported in the edit warring page.--MarshalN20 | Talk 03:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, now we have the WP:BLP argument... I think we have some kind of consensus as Pristino is the only one rejecting the official picture. I will wait if someone else has another argument against it and then I will change the picture. --B1mbo (talk) 14:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, but Pristino is welcome to continue the discussion while the official picture should be placed in the page. Dentren | Talk 17:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
yes use whatever picture is official. Likeminas (talk) 20:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox poll figures‎

[edit]

I have reverted Neon Sky's poll figures in the first infobox to the original ones. I will tell briefly why I think the previous figures are better than the ones Neon Sky posted.

The CEP poll (whose numbers are used in the infobox) has two ways of asking people for their candidate of choice in a runoff scenario:

Method A) The interviewer openly asks the person for their choice and the person must openly answer. This is the "questionnaire" method.
Method B) The interviewer gives the person a ballot and a pencil, and the person secretly votes for his/her preferred candidate, placing the ballot inside a locked box. This is the "ballot box vote" method.

The original infobox poll figures used the results from method B, because it mimicks how people actually vote in the election, giving a more reliable result.

Furthermore, the original figures only included the results from the subgroup of registered voters, not the total sample. (In Chile, only those persons registered to vote can actually vote in the election.)

In short, the original infobox figures showed the results from registered voters using the ballot-box voting method. Neon Sky's figures showed the results from the total sample (which includes non-registered persons) using the non-secret voting method. Pristino (talk) 22:06, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Map

[edit]

It may seem trivial but is it not better to have the map in its vertical position to place north at the top? Few people can look at this map and know whether left is east or west. I know space is a problem but does anyone object? Evlekis (talk) 11:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was done this way due to the country's long and narrow geography. Map accuracy in geographic orientation is not really necessary for this kind of use. Pristino (talk) 07:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Majority

[edit]

The link New Majority link under the photo of Marco Enríquez-Ominami leads to a TV-series, not to a party. I don't know how to correct that. Please excuse my bad English, it is not my mother tongue 80.109.143.123 (talk) 18:41, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 2009–10 Chilean presidential election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:25, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on 2009–10 Chilean presidential election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2009–10 Chilean presidential election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:50, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2009–10 Chilean presidential election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2009–10 Chilean presidential election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 39 external links on 2009–10 Chilean presidential election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:10, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2009–10_Chilean_general_election&oldid=1196555912"