Talk:2007 Venezuelan constitutional referendum

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2007 Venezuelan constitutional referendum article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 12 months

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

Venezuela Mid‑importance

	Venezuela portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Venezuela, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Venezuela 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.VenezuelaWikipedia:WikiProject VenezuelaTemplate:WikiProject VenezuelaVenezuela
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Edit conflict on Evo Morales

I got an edit conflict with this Evo Morales addition after massive work; now I see it was sourced to VenAnalysis, does anyone have a reliable source so I can re-add it? Still working through the list above. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Templates disrupting flow of text and article

Regarding this edit, copy of a talk page note I left for Nightstallion (talk · contribs).

Please see the note I left here quite a bit ago. Those templates are horribly formatted, and destroy the formatting of the main article. The results should be arranged side by side, or the template should allow for right alignment so text can be added on the left. I tried, and am unable to make those corrections; I don't "speak HTML", and that template code was removed from the main tally template that was created by someone else. Adding horribly designed templates that disrupt the flow of the text to the middle of an article that is on the main page is not a good idea, IMO. I've moved the templates to the bottom, but they still disrupt the entire article, causing the reader to have to scan a lot of info they won't care about in order to reach the sources, etc. at the bottom of the article. Please help address this if you feel so strongly about including that info in the article, because right now, those templates are truly ugly. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Full results

Full results are in at http://www.cne.gov.ve/noticiaDetallada.php?id=4354 -- I'll update the election results template on Monday, if noone does it by then. (I'd prefer it if someone else could do it before then, though.) —Nightstallion 14:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to update the template, but the table design contains too much original research; I can't make the numbers add up considering the vote tallies in each block are different, and the double 100% don't make sense, and I don't know which total is being used (Block A or B). Also, the source doesn't seem to indicate these are final results (only 94% counted), so I'm not sure it's worth the trouble. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newsweek article

This certainly seems interesting:

But by midweek enough information had emerged to conclude that Chávez did, in fact, try to overturn the results. As reported in El Nacional, and confirmed to me by an intelligence source, the Venezuelan military high command virtually threatened him with a coup d'état if he insisted on doing so. Finally, after a late-night phone call from Raúl Isaías Baduel, a budding opposition leader and former Chávez comrade in arms, the president conceded—but with one condition: he demanded his margin of defeat be reduced to a bare minimum in official tallies, so he could save face and appear as a magnanimous democrat in the eyes of the world.

[1].

DJ Creamity^{Oh Yeah!} 20:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, status quo. It may surprise non-Venezuelans to realize that the military in Venezuela are highly regarded, generally democratic, and still respectful of the people first, even after Chávez's purge of the military. Some sort of content along the lines of the segment above should eventually be added, but more time may be needed to avoid recentism and obtain the most reliable sources, as the story develops. (So far, The Economist link in the article touches upon some of the other undeveloped issues in this article.) As the article currently stands, the magnitude of Chavez's loss isn't made clear; it is the millions of voters who abstained, compared to the number that supported him in previous votes, that demonstrate how large the loss was. The current article focus on the narrow margin in the vote is a bit misleading. Seven million people voted for him a year ago, only four million did this time; reliable sources have dealt with this, but this point hasn't yet been developed in the article. The brouhaha that went on election night hasn't been developed yet, nor have the irregularities been discussed (see citation list above). Not enough hours in the day. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This rumor has been denied by main oposition parties Un Nuevo Tiempo [2], Primero Justicia [3], the Venezuelan military high command[4] and the CNE[5]. JRSP (talk) 21:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And of course, that would be included; just as the CIA rumors, which are based on non-reliable sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, just be sure to attribute the "analysis" to Jorge Castañeda [6][7]. He's not my concept of neutral, a very polemic man indeed. JRSP (talk) 22:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I'd use the source above anyway; it's a Newsweek "web exclusive", whatever that means. As I said, I suggest we wait until more reliable sources cover the issue as the story develops. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Aftermatch" Article

Jack Daniel, Frank (3-1-2008). "Venezuela's Chavez reshuffles cabinet afterdefeat". Reuters. Retrieved 3-1-2008. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |date= (help)

Interesting stuff, but I'm mostly wondering whether Reuters archives. Xavexgoem (talk) 04:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about that. I'm almost sure they archive but in any case you can always count on archive.org. (http://www.archive.org ) --JRSP (talk) 19:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stratfor

@WMrapids: Could you please mention how did you get the recently introduced information? Both links are dead and Web Archive doesn't throw any results: [8][9]. NoonIcarus (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google. WMrapids (talk) 06:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rude. It's your responsibility to ensure the verifiability of the content. --NoonIcarus (talk) 16:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WMrapids: Thanks for correcting the deadlinks on 10:45, 12 March 2024.

@NoonIcarus: When you accused WMrapids of being rude, had you not noticed that s/he had already corrected the deadlinks six hours earlier? Did you even try to correct the deadlinks before you made the initial post? I think an apology is in order. --David Tornheim (talk) 22:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]