| Revision as of 16:54, 5 December 2009 editCathar11 (talk | contribs)Rollbackers2,739 edits →Reflinks toolserver← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:32, 5 December 2009 edit undoCathar11 (talk | contribs)Rollbackers2,739 edits →Election Returns: replyNext edit → | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| The initial 60% was disengeous to say the least, knowing the attention span of international audiences.] (]) 16:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC) | The initial 60% was disengeous to say the least, knowing the attention span of international audiences.] (]) 16:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :Its simple maths TSE changed what it was a % of by adjusting arbitrarily the figure. | |||
| :Hagamos Democracia was accredited by the TSE as election observers. They are an NGO, funded by various governments, including the United States. | |||
| :Their methodology was to select a sample of 1173 mesas electorales from around the country based on criteria like their history of participation in previous elections and other criteria. In each of these mesas electorales, they established an observer who was present the whole time, from the time the polling place opened until it closed, and did not visit other mesas electorales as many election observers do. After the polling place closed, their election observer sent them the statistics from that mesa, including the tallied vote counts, and participation from the official "actas" that the TSE has reported to it to tally. Their observers also send in their own statistics gathered from their observations during the day. | |||
| :Hagamos Democracia told Tiempo that the TSE measured participation against a different electoral roll that was adjusted for emigration, deaths, etc, that the TSE did not share with them. Bú said that Hagamos Democracia was not adjusting the electoral roll for deaths and emigration because it did not have reliable enough information to do so. | |||
| :The TSE has obviously decided to abandon its arbitrary electoral roll (which dissapears 600,000 voters?).] (]) 17:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:32, 5 December 2009
Birnbaum article
Hi - hope you don't mind I threw in a few things on your new article. KConWiki (talk) 03:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- No, thanks alot! I need all the help I can get! Moogwrench (talk) 05:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 04:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
edits to 2009 Honduran constitutional crisis
Thanks for your work. Just a comment: For right now, I think that most edits to the umbrella "constitutional crisis" article should be focused on trimming. Substantive additions should probably go to the sub-articles (at least, they should go there first; and hopefully, only there, as they can be included in trimmed summaries on the umbrella page). Homunq (talk) 19:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Reflinks toolserver
When creating or editing articles where templates arent in use may I suggest using the Reflinks toolserver. I suggest that you don't just take the results given verbatim, but make corrections to clean them up. The results need some manual help; sometimes author names and dates don't get added, and links to publishers are to the website which is not really useful, so link to the wiki article if one exists, sometimes the title is way too long including parent section names that can be removed, etc.
I also found and use an edit counter on my page which shows the main articles edited etc. and graphs them, Just passing on what other people have told meCathar11 (talk) 15:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Election Returns
There is no error in the AFP report. Hagamos Democracia conducted exit polls which agree with the lower figure.
The the TSE measured participation against a different electoral roll that was adjusted for emigration, deaths, etc, that the TSE did not share with them. Bú said that Hagamos Democracia was not adjusting the electoral roll for deaths and emigration because it did not have reliable enough information to do so. Since this was an arbitrary figure that cant stand up to scrutiny they will have to use a similar basis to earlier elections.
In 2005 the TSE website said 2,190,398 people voted, from an electoral roll of 3,976,550 voters. According to Hagamos Democracia, 2,162,000 voted in 2009 from an electoral roll of 4.6 million. That's approximately 28,000 fewer people voting than voted in 2005, while the electoral roll increased by some 600,000 persons. The size of the electoral roll was supplied to Hagamos Democracia by the TSE prior to the election, and was the same number supplied to the press.
The initial 60% was disengeous to say the least, knowing the attention span of international audiences.Cathar11 (talk) 16:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Its simple maths TSE changed what it was a % of by adjusting arbitrarily the figure.
- Hagamos Democracia was accredited by the TSE as election observers. They are an NGO, funded by various governments, including the United States.
- Their methodology was to select a sample of 1173 mesas electorales from around the country based on criteria like their history of participation in previous elections and other criteria. In each of these mesas electorales, they established an observer who was present the whole time, from the time the polling place opened until it closed, and did not visit other mesas electorales as many election observers do. After the polling place closed, their election observer sent them the statistics from that mesa, including the tallied vote counts, and participation from the official "actas" that the TSE has reported to it to tally. Their observers also send in their own statistics gathered from their observations during the day.
- Hagamos Democracia told Tiempo that the TSE measured participation against a different electoral roll that was adjusted for emigration, deaths, etc, that the TSE did not share with them. Bú said that Hagamos Democracia was not adjusting the electoral roll for deaths and emigration because it did not have reliable enough information to do so.
- The TSE has obviously decided to abandon its arbitrary electoral roll (which dissapears 600,000 voters?).Cathar11 (talk) 17:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)