Talk:2022 Brazilian general election/Archive 1

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

{

Archive 1

Danger of deletion

Based on the recent precedent at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2022 in the Philippines, and that apparently consensus has in fact changed, this article could be deleted. I can't begin to state how categorically I disagree with this change in consensus, but it is what it is. Bearian (talk) 01:20, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:34, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

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) 02:52, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Removed logos

Hi JJMC89, I see you removed the logos for:

What you removed are just transclusions from these parties' main articles. Why remove the transclusions here, and not the images there? Also, I see you've replaced Image: calls with File:. Why is that? Is Image: being deprecated? I haven't seen that noted at Help:Pictures. — Guarapiranga ☎ 04:51, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

The party logos are non-free images and can only be used on pages where the non-free rationale is valid (usually only the main page the image is used on). In general, I would say it's best to avoid using party logos on election articles, as they are a mix of free and non-free images, meaning you end up with a mix of some parties having them and others not. Cheers, Number 57 11:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Don't they satisfy {{PD-textlogo}} (bearing in mind Brazil's threshold of originality is substantially higher than the US')? — Guarapiranga ☎ 23:31, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Excessive display of parties

This article lists the parties way too many times. For example, the list of parties in PT's coalition appears 10 times, MDB's coalition 5 times, and the list of all parties appears 4 times, with the full names in Portuguese and English. I also find the party logos too large and distracting. I propose the following:

  • In the tables of candidates, reduce the size of some logos that are too large compared to the photos, such as PL and PCB.
  • In the tables of candidates, remove the party logos of the vice presidential candidates. All except two are the same as of the presidential candidate, so it's repetitive so show it twice. In the two cases where they are different, show the party of the vice presidential candidate only as an acronym in parentheses after the candidate's name. The party of the presidential candidate is much more important in the coalition so it's reasonable to show only that logo.
  • Remove the entire section named Parties. This section occupies a third of the whole article space and it provides no additional information that isn't already shown in the tables of candidates.
  • In the table of Congress, remove the column of party names. The names can already be shown by placing the pointer over the acronyms.
  • In the table of Congress, remove the rows of parties that did not elect any member.

Any comments? Heitordp (talk) 04:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Like that? — Guarapiranga ☎ 05:44, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
@Guarapiranga: Thank you for doing some of these changes. I still think that the entire section named Parties should be removed, because it's very long and this information is already shown in the table of candidates. Do you agree? Heitordp (talk) 16:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
How about that instead? — Guarapiranga ☎ 22:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
@Guarapiranga: Wow, that's impressive! It looks much better, thanks. Heitordp (talk) 05:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

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:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:52, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:07, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:07, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Percentage Vote Counted in the Election

I've started as a new wikipedia editor, however I'd like to know if a rounding system is worked around here or an exact percentage number is needed. This is because I've been updating the page based on the Resultados – TSE numbers, and its ticking up to 100%, but not fully. However, someone has been editing the percentage to 100%. I'd like to ask if there is a rounding system used when tracking percentage numbers. Ellisevanelli (talk) 01:47, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

First round closer than expected.

Politico and Yahoo both have articles talking about how the polls were off on Bolsonaro and that the result was closer than expected. Should this be included in the heading or on the first-round result?[1] [2] 3Kingdoms (talk) 16:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps add some prose to the opinion polls? Cambalachero (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Merged parties

@Aréat: I noticed that you changed the difference in deputies of Brazil Union in the table of results of the chamber, considering the sum of deputies of its predecessor parties (PSL and Democrats). However, you didn't make this change in the table of senators or in the infobox, or for other parties that also merged (PHS into Podemos, PRP into Patriota, PPL into PCdoB). The Superior Electoral Court considers all these mergers to calculate the parties' access to broadcast time and debates.[3] So for consistency, we should consider all these mergers in all tables, or none. Which way do you prefer? Heitordp (talk) 00:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry for the half hassed work. I think it should be applied to all. When a party is a merger, its results should be compared to the combined results of its constituent parties. It think it's less misleading. --Aréat (talk) 01:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Infobox order/First round total in infobox

For this article, either Bolsonaro should be first in the infobox, as he is the incumbent president, or if Lula is going to be listed first since he got the most votes in the first round, the first round vote total should be indicated in the infobox. Without either of these changes, this infobox gives the false impression that Lula is the incumbent president. I would prefer to add the vote totals for the first round to the infobox, but let me know what you all think. GeorgeBailey (talk) 17:36, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

@GeorgeBailey: The first round votes are currently shown in the infobox. Heitordp (talk) 00:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
@Heitordp: Yes, it was changed following this message! Glad to see.GeorgeBailey (talk) 03:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Political violence

The section only mentions Bolsonaro's aggresive rethoric, and then lists a number of crimes, and all of them have something in common: each one is commited by a "lone wolf" criminal, with no links to the others. It's unfortunate that those things happened, but it's not enough to talk about political violence. Did Bolsonaro take this rethoric to actual action? Is there censorship, police brutality against demonstrations, political prisoners or any similar thing? Electoral fraud commited by Bolsonaro? Lynchings? Violent mobs? Anything? We can't even suggest that the state endorses those criminals, even in secrecy, because as the section details they were detained, trialed and sentenced; that's not what happens, for example, after the Venezuelan colectivos attack someone. If there is no evidence of actual violence going on, perhaps the section should be removed. Cambalachero (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I mean, while there have been cases of attacks by Lula supporters (some of which are included here), most cases have been done by Bolsonaro supporters, Lula, in addition, has never told his supporters to kill or attack Bolsonaro supporters, while the opposite has happened, bolsonaro's rethoric, while indirectly, caused much of this, while the govrnment itself doesnt do it or supports it, it still isnt a reason to remove the section, no one is saying that the government is supporting these actions, its just that his aggressive rethoric has, indeed, caused many cases of violence. 2804:14D:4482:46D:CFD:7D86:733:793 (talk) 17:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
The point stands: they are all individual crimes. There is nothing that links them all together, nor government support for it. A handful of crimes is not enough to talk about political violence in general. Cambalachero (talk) 01:31, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
"There is nothing that links them all together", reliable sources disagree. The link is Bolsonaro rethoric in itself and it doesn't matter that Bolsonaro didn't actually killed someone, what matter is that he instigated some of the events that happened per reliable sources. Davide King (talk) 14:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
That's not the way it works. Are those criminals working under Bolsonaro's orders, either directly or as part of a hierarchy that answers to him? Has Bolsonaro encouraged them to do the things they did? If not, there is no link. Also, remember Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#People accused of crime. Cambalachero (talk) 15:54, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
It doesn't apply because we aren't making any of those slippery slope you or fallacies you suggested, we aren't saying that Bolsonaro is guilty or to blame, all that matters is that reliable sources have reported those events. Davide King (talk) 13:57, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Percentage and popular vote mixed up

Page is showing the percent of total under popular vote and the total number of votes under percentage Utopiayouser (talk) 22:05, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

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

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:36, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Analysis and reactions

Would it be worth it to add to the "Reactions" section statements made by various U.S. right-wing personalities like Steve Bannon and organizations such as the New York Young Republican Club congratulating Bolsonaro for "winning" and making unsubstantiated claims the election was "riddled with fraud", similar to what was done with Trump (see https://twitter.com/NYYRC/status/1586841815772192768 , https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/10/trump-big-lie-backers-brazil-jair-bolsonaro-election-fraud-concede/ etc)? HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 19:04, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Looks like some of that was recently added to the reactions abroad section. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 02:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Lula's photo

@CountO-14, Endwise, and Stevan Mitnick: The photos of Lula that you added were from 2003 and 2007, and they are not appropriate for this article on the 2022 election because his appearance has changed since then. I understand that you didn't like the photos of 2018 and 2020 that I had added, so now I changed it to his official campaign photo for the 2022 election. Do you accept this one? Heitordp (talk) 17:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

That image looks good to me -- thanks. Endwise (talk) 18:15, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok Stevan Mitnick (talk) 22:36, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

@CountO-14, Endwise, and Stevan Mitnick: It looks like the campaign photo that I added is not free and will have to be removed. However, the photos of Lula from 2003 in 2007 are way too old to use in this article in 2022. I found some free photos on Flickr that I could crop to show only Lula: [4] [5] [6] [7] Which one do you prefer? Or do you have another suggestion? Heitordp (talk) 12:27, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion the image "National Convention of the PSB - Lula (cropped).jpg" is cropped in a better position than the one currently being used [National Convention of the PSB - Lula (cropped 1).jpg] and I recommend that it be replaced, I would like to know your opinion. Gabriel.Ângelo2909 (talk) 14:21, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Should there be a page for the ongoing protests?

The roadblocks have become very widespread, with involvement from government figures and multiple international news outlets reporting on them.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-01/brazil-protests-grow-with-bolsonaro-silent-after-election-loss

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brazil-election-results-2022-protest-lula-bolsonaro-road-blocks/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-63467982 Yannkemper (talk) 20:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

If it continues for more than a few days, and continues to be widely reported on, then there should probably be a large section devoted to that in this article, and perhaps a separate main article if the blockades continue or expand and the opposition grows in strength. Cheers! 98.155.8.5 (talk) 02:32, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
FYI: the Portuguese Wiki already started an article for the blockades: pt:Bloqueio de estradas no Brasil em outubro de 2022. Erick Soares3 (talk) 17:56, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
I have just translated it (in Portuguese there were enough for an article): Roadblocks in Brazil in October 2022. Erick Soares3 (talk) 18:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
Cool, nice work Erick Soares3 !! Cheers. 98.155.8.5 (talk) 05:21, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
You're welcome! Now is only necessary to include the English language sources (if it have anything new). Erick Soares3 (talk) 09:21, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

The Political Violence Section

is a new low for wikipedia. Wiki's own co-founder has written extensively about the left-wing hijacking of wiki in recent times but this is beyond disgraceful. Implicating Jair Bolsonaro in the actions of some deranged random person would be considered wildly inappropriate just a few years ago and be immediately strucken down. Now it's par for the course. 107.77.241.63 (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

really, pushing the "left wing hijacking" conspiracy theory again, this is blatant bs, no one is alsxo saying that bolsonaro is the one doing the violence, but the problem is that his violent rethoric indeed caused many of these "deranged people" to commit these acts. 2804:14D:4482:46D:CFD:7D86:733:793 (talk) 17:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
the only dangerous rhetoric is the rhetoric of censorship by jewish misanthropes. 124.169.157.59 (talk) 09:32, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
It's comparable to recanting the events of the 2020 summer BLM riots in a "Political Violence" section under the 2020 US election page. BSC-56 (talk) 14:21, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
difference is that BLM wasnt killing people because of their support for anyone, most protests were indeed peaceful, and the ones that had violence, the violence was directed at stores (for looting), so it really didnt have to do with the election. 2804:14D:4482:46D:CFD:7D86:733:793 (talk) 17:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Mirroring 2020 Election in the U.S.

No source is provided for this claim in the lead, and it is laughable to suggest that Bolsonaro based his election strategy off Trump's without any evidence that his campaign actually did this. Also, he did not in fact execute a self-coup or refuse to concede as the lead suggests, which makes it highly misleading. Bill Williams 19:28, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

In the end Bolsonaro did concede, which the lead should state, and the part about Trump should be removed, since it is a single sentence in the body about a Nature article, yet the body has thousands of sentences, so using one sentence to add one sentence to the much smaller lead is not a proper summary. Bill Williams 19:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2022_Brazilian_general_election/Archive_1&oldid=1151786761"