Talk:Enrique Peña Nieto/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Starting overhaul

I am going to start by removing section after section that does not talk about him. This article needs some real work.....lots just copy and pasted from article where he is mentioned in passing. Looking for any help here as many of the sources I cant read....will look for English sources where possible/.--Moxy (talk) 02:00, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

gasolinza separate article??

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-05/looting-riots-mexico-spiral-out-control-over-20-gas-hike-hundreds-arrested

seems to show there should be a separate article as there is in Spanish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.162.68.111 (talk) 08:48, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Seems sufficiently notable, I'd say go nuts! Need better sources than zerohedge though... Fyddlestix (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good. This article is a bit long and broad, it'd be nice to have another article which better ties-togther his energy policy with this crisis. Reidgreg (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

copyvio?

Was just reading this NY times article .....then came here to see what we say. What we say here is awful close. Going to look if this is an overall problem with the article.--Moxy (talk) 00:16, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

For example ...

Wiki....

Since 2011, the Mexican Government invested $80 million worth of spyware. Pegasus spyware infiltrates a persons cellphone and reports every detail of their messages, e-mails, contacts and calendars......

I show this article to my friends to show how biased Wikipedia can be.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I think this article can be improved by trimming down the controversy's section. The subject may or may not have done some bad things, but this article looks so, so bad. Read through: Wikipedia:Attack page. The last tag was listed on September 2016... it has been two years... I don't feel bad for the guy, I feel bad for Wikipedia. Please have a read of Wikipedia:Core content policies as well. LivinRealGüd (talk) 06:39, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Update: It looks like this article is gunna have to be blown up and restarted. 66% of this article is either biased, unsourced, or unnotable–that my friends is insurmountable. I would suggest re-drafting and re-introducing it as a new live article. LivinRealGüd (talk) 05:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

The Article is not biased EPN is considered one of the worst presidents of Mexico and criminal by the average mexican folk

The article was not biased at all, everything was sourced. But now that you are removing content without explanation, I see way more bias than there was before. I suspect you want to change the article into something more favorable in order to benefit the political campaign of PRI's new candidate Jose Antonio Meade. If you read mexican news, as much as I do EPN is a heavilly despised man within his country, and is seen as a criminal, most people want him jailed and also disprove his presidency. You should re-add all the content you removed, and if you want to turn this article into something more favorable, well better start looking for favorable news about EPN, I suggest you Televisa News and Milenio, those are the ones that receive more money from the mexican goverment in exchange of positive coverage towards EPN and the PRI. Rosvel92 (talk) 04:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC) Rosvel92

Perhaps best you edit another topic because the above is one of the most non-neutral inflammatory posts I've ever seen Wikipedia:Advocacy.--Moxy (talk) 15:00, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Getting this article back on track

I hope the current state of the article and the above comment illustrates and motivates interested parties to enforce Wikipedia's policies of WP:NEUTRAL, WP:ORIGINAL, and WP:VERIFY. Look, I understand Mexico's president has done some bad things but this is an Attack Page and overtly biased. LivinRealGüd (talk) 14:29, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Any improvement would be great....it's hard to keep up with editors that clear have a bias. Huge portions can be removed.--Moxy (talk) 14:46, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

@Moxy, ha I was hoping I wouldn't have to do any work, thats the problem, the only people who are interested in this article are people who want to disparage the subject and the only people who are neutral don't care about this article. Ah, as is life. I'm thinking of just straight up blowing up entire sections that don't comply with even the most basic of WikiPolicies. Thoughts? What should I look at first? LivinRealGüd (talk) 14:52, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

What is needed is balance....as you say the page is simply horrible. Don't be worried about the bias editors because when confronted with their POV problem most will leave.--Moxy (talk) 14:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Gotcha. Alright, here goes nothing. LivinRealGüd (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

We do have to make sure views like this are not omitted.... just presented respectfully and with balance.--Moxy (talk) 15:21, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely, you get it. I have cleaned up the lead to reflect that. LivinRealGüd (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Editors should look to the following pages to add information that involve the subject but not directly pertain to him:

• Mexican general election, 2018
• Institutional Revolutionary Party
• Security policy of the Enrique Peña Nieto administration
• Politics of Mexico

 Done: I have finished my edits. If there are any questions ping me "@LivinRealGüd". I'm sure there is still some work to be done (updating, etc.) but I believe that I have addressed the major issues present on the article. LivinRealGüd (talk) 18:16, 28 April 2018 (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.

Article is too positive towards the living person it does not even mention the white house conflict of interest

The white house conflict of interest and Odebretch have received international coverage and are clearly corruption scandals, and are not mentioned within this article at all. I feel this article is biased to help him seen like a better person and influence the mexican elections to beneffit the PRI. I added a lack of neutrality note as this article is more positive than my unbiased edit that mentioned all of EPN's crimesRosvel92 (talk) 05:19, 28 May 2018 (UTC)rosvel92

Given that it was your edits that caused this article to require such a substantial overhaul, and that you've brought your anti-PRI bias onto several other pages, I don't think you're exactly on solid ground disputing the POV here. I'm removing the template. — Kawnhr (talk) 18:01, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Resolving the constant removal and addition of biased-or-not info

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Considering how much perceived bad publicity there is of this man, a "Public image of Enrique Peña Nieto" should be created. Considering there are already various "Public image of [insert well-know politician here]" articles on wikipedia, it would only be fair for all the users that are constantly removing and adding the large portions of information. Leave this article for biographical purposes. All other criticism and public image perception of him on the proposed page. Gumbi93 (talk) 17:16, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

I think fixing one attack page is easier than two attack pages. A public image page would also have to comply with WP:BLP so you can not use that as a mechanism to disparage the subject. LivinRealGüd (talk) 01:17, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

What is the difference between both Trump and Peña Nieto that warrants one having multiple pages and sections dedicated to his various scandals, media gaffes, and controversial allegations yet the other remains scot-free? The Spanish version of this article already lists a variety of his scandals yet the current English version only has a sentence about both the 2014 Iguala mass kidnapping and improper citations & plagiarism on his thesis, nothing about the Odebrecht scandal even though the Wikipedia articles of other Latin American politicians have a portion regarding it, there is no mention of the Panama Papers, neither a mention of the investigation regarding conflict of interest of the Mexican White House, and various other questionable incidents that have warranted his name to pop up in discussion. There is no attempt to cut down and revise the inserted biased information – only mere deletion without any thought put into it – thus contributing to a strong bias that continues to exist on the article. The following Latin American politicians have significant sections dedicated to controversies and/or legal issues: Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, Ollanta Humala, Nicolás Maduro, Daniel Ortega, Mauricio Macri, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, Rafael Correa, Dilma Rousseff. What makes Peña Nieto different that he doesn't need a subsection dedicated controversies? Gumbi93 (talk) 19:51, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Fascinating that out off all those Latin American countries, you couldn't come up with a Mexican politician. The difference? For some reason, editors editing Mexican politicians can not maintain neutrality or abide by BLP policies. As for your Donald Trump note, I wouldn't use any Trump articles to build your case. A lot of them are also in blatant violation of BLP standards. They, too, are slowly getting fixed. Do you honestly expect me to believe that a controversies section on this article would ever be balanced, in perspective, and neutrally written? Didn't think so. I applaud your tack though. If I was trying to do what you were, I would cherry pick Latin Americana articles (ignore all the poorly written ones about Mexican politicians) and draw a parallel to Trump. That would win me points with anti-Trump editors while painting me as a reasoned. However, judging by your brief and concentrated edit history and tone of your posts, I am interested to know what you actually want. This is not to say you shouldn't add controversial content to the article. If a subject has done something, it should surly be added to the article. That being said, be prepared to be reverted and for frequent page restoration. LivinRealGüd (talk) 23:49, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

These are not cherry picked Latin American articles. On the contrary, these are the highest ranking Latin American politicians in case you couldn't tell. If you want Mexican politicians, here you go: Felipe Calderon, José Antonio Meade, Carlos Romero Deschamps. The only thing I want is that this article should at least follow the scandals listed on the Spanish Wikipedia Enrique Peña Nieto page. The state of the current page is way too biased (against Peña Nieto), but there should be some mention of his scandals as they have affected his public image, as well as greatly contributing to the 2018 general election results due to the negative image of the Institutional Revolutionary Party. Gumbi93 (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

I feel the edit to make EPN seem like less as one of the worst presidents of Mexico was done in order to interfere with this weekends elections. I would suggest to investigate the person who reverted the edits. This are some of the presidentials scandals that absolutely should ve mentioned:

• Mexican White house conflict of interest on bullet train Mexico-Queretaro (There's also a second and third mexican white house)
  • Undeserved firing of news journalist Carmen Aristegui (for revealing the White House scandall)
  • China suing Mexico (because the company that should have won was chinesse and the train was cancelled due to to the controversy)
• Plagiarism of University Thesis (known as Thesisgate)
• Odebretch ilegal campaign money
• Soriana cards vote buyout
• EPN's cousin Alfredo del Mazo Electoral fraud for governor election in the state of Mexico
• Peñabots (social media bots to simulate fake support)
• Spy goverment towards news jurnalists, social activists and AMLO
• Yo Soy 132 (Televisa brives for bias to favor EPN)
• Ayotzinapa 43 students dissapearance
• Saving Mexico Time's magazine cover featuring EPN (super criticized by all of Mexico)
• Presidential plane misuse scandals
• Mexicans hating EPN more than Donald Trump, and the super critized invitation of Donald Trump to Mexico while Trump was only a candidate
• Acarriados to Mexican Independence Holiday and to presidential yearly goverment informes
• Protest and march against EPN's goverment
• Publicity money spent going overbudget
• gasolinazo (rise in gasoline prices)
• Firing of Santiago Nieto from FEPADE
• Preidential candidates promising to investigate and incarcerate Enrique Pe;a Nieto
• lowest aproval rating of all mexico;s presidents, ever since presidential aprovals are measured
• Dedazo of PRI's Presidential candidate Jose Antonio Meade
• Speling mistakes and stupid mistakes people mock EPN

've detailed those things one way or another on previous edits that were removed due to being considered "biased" just search rosvel92, you can copy from there and use it to save this article from the PRO EPN bias. Maybe I went too offhand, but truth of the matter is that many consider EPN a criminalRosvel92 (talk) 08:32, 27 June 2018 (UTC)Rosvel92

pls see Wikipedia:Help available for editors with conflicts of interest....best not to edit page because you have a conflict of interest .--Moxy (talk) 12:03, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Not only that but take a read through Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, lots of helpful guidance on there as well. Also, you misspelled "spelling mistakes" and please do not reformat talk page headers. LivinRealGüd (talk) 02:49, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Article is biased to not mention any of the corruption scandalls of EPN

Article is biased to not mention any of the corruption scandalls of EPN. Should also mention along the things mentioned above:

• How all presiantial candidate discuted on how to incarcerate EPN, because of his corruption during his time as presidency
• the 28 fugitive exgovernors from the PRI that are criminal or investigated
• How EPN's caused Jose Antonio Meade, the presidential candidate of the PRI to be dead on arrivalRosvel92 (talk) 01:51, 2 July 2018 (UTC)Rosvel92

Comment: Rosvel92, what the hell are you doing? Talk pages aren't to be restructured on your whims just to suit your arguments. Especially not when you make it completely unreadable in the process. I've restored it to how it was; do not do that again. — Kawnhr (talk) 07:51, 2 July 2018 (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.

Archive 1

Archive 2