Talk:2021 Peruvian general election

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• JulioGuzman2016.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:07, 16 August 2019 (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:

• JulioGuzmanperu.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:23, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Candidates gallery

Doctor Speed, Roque Benavides has DECLINED his candidacy, and PPK and Aráoz have not said a word and have not been featured in polls, it's just assumed they won't run, and they haven't given any public statements. In Vizcarra's case, he just can't run, it's not an official decline. And the first five candidates in the gallery are not the first five leading the polls as the abstract implies. It's totally wrong. Búfalo Barreto (talk) 03:43, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

@Búfalo Barreto: Apologies for the late reply. Please ping me if you need my attention, as there is no way for me to know you posted this. Jesus Christ, this page is a mess. Did you format the page? There's no need to add fifty different colors and dozens of tables for candidates and tickets. Please keep this page in the style as other Wikipedia election pages.

Also, for one, Vizcarra is eligible to run for reelection. As stated in the 1993 Constitution, the ELECTED President cannot run for reelection. Former President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski was elected, and Vizcarra assumed the presidency via constitutional succession. There are numerous articles online that restate that. Here's one for instance. I'm not going to keep going because you can just check the sources I referenced in my edit which you reverted, twice. I've seen on your talk page that you have a copious history of edit-warring on pages and getting blocked for doing so, which is why I haven't reverted your changes.

Please be sure to have a source to back your claim if you are going to assert that something is "totally wrong". Simply being Peruvian or watching daytime Peruvian television does not qualify as being a proper source. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨

Colors

I don't think it's such a good idea using two colors for the same party in the candidate headcolumn. It make it a source a confusion, as we use one color to identify one party in the diagrams, tables and their own pages, yet by using two here some candidates have for second color the primary one of another candidate. Using only the latter is preferable. --Aréat (talk) 09:34, 27 November 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:

• Pedro Castillo2.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

first .... president

I don't think first leftist president of Peru since Ollanta Humala is something special because he was president until 2016. Braganza (talk) 08:22, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree it's not worth mentioning. Number 57 08:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Deleting sentence about 'pink tide'

The article cited in support of the claim that Castillo's would be part of a new pink tide is behind a paywall, but the title of the article suggests that it does not make any claim of this sort. It literally says it's premature for the Latin American left to proclaim a new pink tide, and in any case Castillo's policies don't necessarily seem to align with the moderate socially democracy the pink tide referred to. The whole pink tide claim in this wiki appears just to be the opinion of whoever wrote it. I'm deleting it. Bernardfitz (talk) 13:37, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Time to make this protected?

There seems to be a biased edit war making unsubstantiated, biased, and politically motivated claims Calandracas888 (talk) 03:31, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I know this is already semi protected but maybe it needs to be elevated. Claims of fraud are being made and the citation to those claims explicitly say the claims are unsubstantiated (guardian) Calandracas888 (talk) 03:51, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Time to call the race?

According to the official government page, some 99.795% of all votes (including both in Peru and voters abroad) have now been processed, and Castillo is ahead by more than 70K votes. It's close, but doesn't look like his lead can be overtaken. [1] -2003:CA:8748:5CF7:2C97:4AC2:9018:2043 (talk) 11:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree, now there is some 40k votes left and his lead is bigger than that. There is no way Fujimori can flip this. --79.140.150.58 (talk) 11:43, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

with 99.795% counted, and assuming 100% turn out, there's only 50,972 possible votes, so if i did my math right it's impossible for castillos to lose. The argument against calling it here would be that it's very likely fujimori will challenge the results with a recount, although it's unlikely to flip the result Calandracas888 (talk) 11:51, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Agree It is mathematically impossible for Fujimori to surpass Castillo's lead. We can make a projection on the results as of now, not taking the whole electoral verification (fraud allegations) into account, which might take weeks. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨

At the moment I really don't see how it would be mathematically possible for Fujimori to overturn Castillo, so the election is more or less over, her complaints regarding their conduct notwithstanding. However, we would need RS to call it before we do, though. I'm guessing they will very soon. Goodposts (talk) 18:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

It seems appropriate to call it. ABC International has called it and local Peruvian sources like El Nacional have called it. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 19:09, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. The diference between the candidates is of 67,000, but there still ~300k votes left to be counted from the "atas impugnadas". It is important to note that the vast majority of these "atas impugnadas" are from regions where Keiko had more than 60% of the votes (Lima and abroad). Érico (talk) 19:55, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Fact Check. That does not seem to be the case though. You are citing "actas impugnadas" which are only 435 as of now. Each "acta" has 300 votes, so with a 74% turnout you are looking at around ~90,000 to ~100,000 votes that are being contested. Not 300,000. 110 of these actas are from overseas citizens, and 243 are from Lima, both regions where Fujimori leads with 66% of the vote. With a difference of 67,000 votes, Fujimori would have to win 70,000 of the "actas impugnadas" votes (77.8%) for her to secure the general election by a very insignificant <1,000 votes. That is highly unlikely, and arguably impossible. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨

@Érico See WP:NOR. Virtually all reliable sources are agreed that Castillo has an uncatchable lead at this point, and many RSs have already called the race. We follow the RSs - we do not create our own narratives. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 21:29, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Reuters is not "original search". 385k votes left can change the outcome. Érico (talk) 21:39, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

See WP:NOR "This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not stated by the sources." Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 23:14, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree. Having several reliable sources calling the race is enough to follow suit, considering there isn't contradictory ones.--Aréat (talk) 23:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Based on the current official results, only 14 actas remain to be counted and 12 of them are in Cusco, where Castillo has a 60 point lead. Only two remain in Loreto, where Fujimori has a very narrow lead. However even if we assume 100% turnout in these Actas, that’s only 4,200 votes and Castillo has a 79,000 vote lead, not to mention it’s likely that at least a large portion of those in Cusco will go to Castillo. While I get that it might be good to follow another media outlet formally declaring him the winner, I don’t see any other reason to not call it.Brendanww2 (talk) 00:07, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

The vote totals are (confusingly given the prominence of the figure) not from the actas procesadas, but the actas contabilizadas, (see the note under the table in the source) so there are quite a few more to be counted. Number 57 00:13, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

• I think its time to call it for Castillo. At 08:50 Peruvian time, 100% of the votes have been counted with Castillo in the lead. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
  • No, we're still on 99.563% of the vote counted. The data in the source is the actas contabilizadas not the actas procesadas (see the note under the table "Estos datos corresponden a las actas contabilizadas"). There is a note in capital letters in the infobox code stating this... Number 57 14:59, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
    • Also, Fujimori has asked for 500,000 votes to be reconsidered and only after that will the ONPE be able to announce the winner.[2] Number 57 15:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Results Update, 50.21 for Castillo and 49.79 for Fujimori

Change the percentage of vote for Pedro Castillo from 50.20% to 50.21% and Keiko Fujimori's from 49.80% to 49.79%. The vote has just updated. Thanks! https://www.resultadossep.eleccionesgenerales2021.pe/SEP2021/EleccionesPresidenciales/RePres/T Alexandre (talk) 12:37, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Run n Fly (talk) 14:03, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Results

Add that Castillo won the second round of the elections. He has 50.21% of votes, and there is only a 0.20% to count. That means that Castillo is mathematically the winner of the elections and next president of Peru. Greek Rebel (talk) 17:30, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

There is still no winner, as there are still votes left to be counted. According to Reuters, "There are some 1,385 contested 'actas,' or voting tables, which is likely to equate to some 300,000 votes. They are set to be counted by a special committee set up by the electoral board, which could take at least a week." Érico (talk) 19:53, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

That source is out of date – it refers to the count being 98% complete. We're now at 99.8. There are only another 156 actas left to count according to the ONPE. Number 57 19:57, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57: Hello.

No. You are misleading the data. At the moment, 99.82% of atas are counted, but 1,155 of these total are sent to judgment of JNE (Jurado Nacional de Elecciones). The website explains:

ACTAS PROCESADAS 99.820 % (*) 86,332

ACTAS ENVIADAS AL JNE 1,155

And, according to Reuters:

Exactly 1,384 ballot tables so far have been sent for further review, a number not significantly higher than in the last election cycle. The reasons are diverse, from a lack of signatures to arithmetic mistakes to doubts about whether a vote was properly marked in a ballot.

Could the contested votes swing the vote?

Anything can happen. Almost half of the contested ballots are in Lima, a bastion of support for Fujimori.

I urge us to wait Peru's electoral board to declare the winner and not us. Érico (talk) 20:02, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

If those actas have been counted, are their figures actually excluded from the totals? If so then fair enough. Where are Reuters getting their data from though?? Number 57 20:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Right now, electoral authorities are judging these 1,155 atas (live from Youtube). I have now quoted the Reuters link. In my view, the estimate of Reuters is simple: total number of voters (25,287,954) minus those already counted (24,902,633) = 385,321, which can change the outcome. Érico (talk) 20:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Fact Check. That does not seem to be the case though. You are citing "actas impugnadas" which are only 435 as of now. Each "acta" has 300 votes, so with a 74% turnout you are looking at around ~90,000 to ~100,000 votes that are being contested. Not 300,000. 110 of these actas are from overseas citizens, and 243 are from Lima, both regions where Fujimori leads with 66% of the vote. With a difference of 67,000 votes, Fujimori would have to win 70,000 of the "actas impugnadas" votes (77.8%) for her to secure the general election by a very insignificant <1,000 votes. That is highly unlikely, and arguably impossible. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨

Please see my coment above. There are 385,000 votes left to be count from "ACTAS ENVIADAS AL JNE 1,152" and "Mesas Por Informar (P) 156". Érico (talk) 20:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

You have cited "actas impugnadas" in your comment above, not "actas enviadas". DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨ 20:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

All of this will be judged by JNE. 385k votes can change the outcome. We need to be cautious and wait the declaration of winner by election commission. Érico (talk) 20:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

How it's possible to change the winner? Even if all the votes that have not counted yet go to Fujimori, Castillo is the winner (49.81 + 0.18 = 49.99) 91.140.47.134 (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

It's simple: the 385k votes left to be counted can change the outcome. It's not only 0.18%; Reuters explained that. Érico (talk) 20:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Decide the counted votes percentage. How it's 98.5% while before it was 99.8? And how it's possible to say that there 385k votes to count now AND yesterday the same? The votes that counted have increased. So what do you want to say, that all the edits and the increase of the voted counts through these two days was fake? The editors were not relying at sources? I find this impossible... 91.140.47.134 (talk) 22:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

It's simple. Return to the right version: [3]. Greek Rebel (talk) 23:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure he changed the metric to use the actas contabilizadas instead of the more usual actas procesadas. Goodposts (talk) 23:16, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I did, because the previous version was wrong. I also previously thought the vote totals were from the actas procesadas, but if you look closely at the source, they are actually from the actas contabilizadas. There is a note under the data table stating "Estos datos corresponden a las actas contabilizadas". The version suggested by Greek Rebel is therefore wrong. Number 57 23:29, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The journal El Comercio explained that today (here):

"De acuerdo a los avances de la ONPE, hasta ayer había 1.303 actas observadas, que implican más de 300 mil votantes, mas no necesariamente adhesiones. El miércoles llegan los últimos votos del extranjero";

"El exjefe de la ONPE Fernando Tuesta explicó a El Comercio que cada mesa en el Perú tiene un promedio de 200 a 250 electores hábiles. Si tomamos esta última cifra, se trataría de 325.750 votantes, mas no adhesiones. Esto, porque a ese total habría que restarle los que no sufragaron, así como los votos nulos y blancos para determinar los votos en juego."

"En opinión de experto en derecho electoral José Tello, la resolución de actas observadas y su cómputo sí podrían tener algún importante efecto. “Esto está apretado por decenas de miles de votos. Por supuesto que pueden cambiar la historia y los números. Ni el señor Castillo ni la señora Fujimori pueden cantar victoria”, advirtió."

There are right now 1,059 "actas enviadas a JNE" and 114 "mesas por informar." This is still a very significant number (more than 300k).

So, the outcome can change.

Érico (talk) 23:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

We should know soon enough. It's a fairly prominent election and RS have already shown good interest in it. I don't think it will be long until RS call it, which is when we ought to, too. Goodposts (talk) 21:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

RSs called it yesterday. TeleSUR. El Pais. ABC International. Chicago Tribune. El Caribe. El Nacional. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 06:24, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

• I concern about the shift from Actas Procesadas to Actas Contabilizadas in the "Reporting" field. Each of the percentage may surpass the other through out time, leaving the reader unable to know what percentage he's reading about. Theoretically, the best option is giving the product of the two numbers or the minimum of the two numbers, however, since neither the official count nor any media provide such result, Wikipedia is not allowed to do this calculation. Plus, calling Actas Contabilizadas "Reporting" is incorrect because 100% of confirmed legal box has been reported (Actas Procesadas). Now giving Actas Procesadas (Greek Rebel (talk · contribs)) is confusing, giving Actas Contabilizadas (from the begining, which may be 100% at the begining of the count) is misleading and giving their minimum (what English Wikipedia is doing now per Number 57 (talk · contribs) and Érico (talk · contribs)) is conducting calculation, thus being original research, misleading and inconsistent with all other articles and Wikipedia conventions, literally the worst option we have do. Unfortunately there's no good option according to the current Wikipedia policy and the best we can do is being confusing. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 05:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure why this keeps having to be explained, but the OPNE website states that the results table data is from the actas contabilizadas not the actas procesadas (see the note under the data table: "Estos datos corresponden a las actas contabilizadas"). We had been using actas procesadas previously as no-one had noticed this clarification. Switching to 100% reporting based on the actas procesadas is misleading because there are still votes being counted and the results will continue to change. Number 57 17:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
    • @Number 57: Thank you! Yet I don't think you really understood the issue I was concerned with. I agreed with most part of what Érico (talk · contribs) said after reading it (and the Reuters) on 10th, and I had no problem with the fact that the counting had de facto not ended. That part of discussion had concluded so you don't have to explain it again. Using 100% reporting based on the actas procesadas is, of course, confusing.
    • If we really could use Actas Contabilizadas from begining for all future elections, I wouldn't have any problem with that. Unfortunately, that was simply not the case. The Actas Contabilizadas at the begining of the election, when few tickets were processed and no box were contested, was 100%. Imagine, for example, if all the processors said "ahh... we have worked too hard these days and will have a rest during the weekends" leaving all scrutinzers working on weekend, later actas contabilizadas would become 100% while actas procesadas would become 99.888%. What would Wikipedia do in that case? The actas contabilizadas only matters in very rare tricky cases when counting has technically ended yet de facto not. It's not that "we had been using actas procesadas previously as no-one had noticed this clarification", but that "we had been keeping use actas procesadas after it surpass the actas contabilizadas as no-one had noticed what really matters". That being said, switching to Actas Contabilizadas in a "Reporting" field is not only incorrect, but also inconsistent with other articles and Wikipedia guildances. It's so sad that we are indeed in a dilemma that whatever we write it would become a shame of Wikipedia, but we can choose to make it a small shame (being confusing yet technically correct) instead of a bigger one (being incorrect and inconsistent albeit less confusing). "The reporting is technically 100% yet believe it or not, the counting is far from being ended" - that's the correct tone. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 20:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
      • I think you have misunderstood how the % of actas contabilizadas are calculated. They are not the % of actas procesadas that have become contabilizadas; they are calculated as a % of all actas. See this capture from a couple of days ago, when the % of actas contabilizadas (83,441) was 96.477% of the total actas (86,488) and 98.367% of the actas procesadas (84,826). The % of actas contabilizadas is given as 96.477%. The calculation method is confirmed in the source, which has a note on how it is calculated (see the ** note). Number 57 22:11, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
        • Thank you a lot! The link above could be accessed if "if_" after the timestamp is removed (otherwise it would be a whitescreen). You're right. 96.477% does equal 83,441/86,488 instead of 84,826/86,488, where 83,441=83,424+14+3. I didn't pay attention to the formula with (**) carefully. Sorry for this. @Greek Rebel: It also turns out that the percentage is a very rough calculation (not by tickets but by boxes) which doesn't reflect de facto proceeding so one has to wait until it reaches 100% to say someone has mathematicallty win, because there's always a chance that the last box contains millions of tickets. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
        • The other thing I concern is consistency, which is the an important value I believe. If this time we use actas contabilizadas percentage, we should use it in all future articles. Even if the contested boxes "Mesas Por Informar (P)" are highly unlike to be valid, before they got scrutinized and declared invalid they should affect the overall "proceeding" field in Wikipedia. We should inform the corresponding WikiProject to set up this as a general guideline, to prevent future mainstream English media to choose whichever percentage convenient to them and to indirectly lead Wikipedia to do the same. The acceptance of the writing style "the Supreme Court of Justice ... ruled ... that all public offices would have no term limits despite what was established in the constitution" in 2019 Bolivian general election and the rejection of the writing style "Upholding of an parliament with less than 10% of female legislators by the Supreme Court despite what was established in the 2013 amendment" in 2021 Samoan constitutional crisis - this inconsistency already set up a very bad example of Wikipedia. --173.68.165.114 (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

ONPE's official tally has reached 100% of all votes handing Castillo a victory in the elections

The official count has been called by the Peruvian governing body of elections, "ONPE". The vote count has reached 100% of all votes with Castillo at 50.197% and Fujimori at 49.803%, handing Castillo a victory as per the official results. Despite Keiko Fujimori's plan to contest the election, these are the official results.

There is precedent set of the American election when Donald Trump contested the election and called it fraudulent despite providing no evidence. We should solely rely on the official results and not claims made by any candidate without any evidence.

Joe Biden was named the president elect despite weeks of recounts that followed, because we go by the official results.

View the results are the ONPE's official website here: https://www.resultadossep.eleccionesgenerales2021.pe/SEP2021/EleccionesPresidenciales/RePres/T

68.161.146.128 (talk) 23:21, 10 June 2021 (UTC) OP 68.161.146.128 (talk) 23:05, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

No, the count isn't over. As pointed out several times above, the figures in the source are not based on the actas procesadas, they are the actas contabilizadas. See the note under the data table in the source that states "Estos datos corresponden a las actas contabilizadas". There are over 700 actas still to be added to the totals. Number 57 23:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

@Number 57: Now it's over. Marko8726 (talk) 05:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

No, it isn't. From the source: "ACTAS CONTABILIZADAS: 99.561 %". There are still up to around 110,000 votes to count. Number 57 08:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I will debold Castillo because no declaration was made. Dividing the current "votos emitidos" (I think votes cast?) by the percentage "contabilizada" reveals 82,000 votes left to be counted. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 15:46, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes. It's almost certain that Castillo has won on the votes cast, but with Fujimori now demanding 500k votes are reconsidered, I don't think we can say anything until the ONPE declares the result. Number 57 15:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to wait until going over 2000000 votes again when all international observers says there's no sign of systematic fraud. During the 2020 US election Trump also ordered recount of a lot of tickets when all international observers said there was no sign of systematic fraud, so people didn't wait the official result. Previously we waited the scrutinzation because that tricky technically scrutinzation was essentially counting. I think when the Actas Contabilizadas reach an irreversible point it's safe although I insist the "reporting" field should be filled with Actas Procesadas (unless we can change color to the percentage bar). --173.68.165.114 (talk) 05:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Castillo has officially won

According ONPE, there are 99.89% votes counted and Castillo has 50.14% of the votes. So he has mathematicaly won. Fujimori orders recount every time she loses. International observers say that there was no fraud, the elections were clear. Wikipedia doesn't care about some absurd claims. Castilo won the election. Bold it again and add this at the results. 46.176.27.111 (talk) 08:36, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Indeed... Change it, it's over. Greek Rebel (talk) 09:57, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree, but let's wait on the other editors for further opinion and analysis. Elserbio00 (talk) 11:04, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Strongly agree, he is leading by some 51'000 votes and the remaining votes to be counted are less than 20'000, there is no way Fujimori can win, even if she won 100% of the remaining vote. Donald Trump also threatened to issue recounts during the 2020 United States presidential election, yet that didn't prevent the folks on that Wikipedia page to declare Joe Biden the winner as soon as he won the electoral college. It's pretty much over. --79.140.150.58 (talk) 12:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Strong agree. Multiple RSs have already called the race. TeleSUR. El Pais. ABC International. Chicago Tribune. El Caribe. El Nacional. We follow the RSs. The only arguments on this page for delaying the declaration of a winner are all WP:OR with people counting up the votes themselves and trying to decide individually whether it's appropriate to call it. That's original research, and it's not what we do on Wikipedia. We follow the RSs and the RSs say that Castillo has won.

Yes, but... where are the editors? Greek Rebel (talk) 16:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

It's a protected page, so only contributors with 500+ edits can edit. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 19:51, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Extended autoconfirmed here. The only reason why I haven't changed it yet is that most English-language sources state he is "on the verge" of winning, or practically certain to win, but generally stop just short of stating that he has already won. That's really the only reason why I haven't edited that in yet. IMO, it seems like a done deal to me, but Wikipedia's recentism and anticipation guidelines tend to prefer waiting until an official declaration, even if the outcome is obvious beforehand. Plus, I don't think we have long to wait until ONPE's announcement and that, I hope, will definitively put an end to it. Best regards, Goodposts (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

It's almost certainly time to call it

It's certain that Pedro Castillo has won, not a lick of doubt that he hasn't. I'm not even going to attempt to humour the idea that Fujimori's fraud claims can be remotely considered credible given that the international community has so far seen not a single convincing allegation of systematic fraud. The fraud investigations have found no evidence and therefore there is no point waiting until Fujimori decides she's ready to whimper into defeat.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/no-serious-irregularities-found-in-perus-disputed-presidential-election/ar-AAKXZJU https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2021/06/13/2003759102

To be entirely fair, Peru's foreign affairs have asked people not to congratulate winners yet. But I'm certain that the result will still be "Oh yeah Pedro won". We didn't wait for Trump's nonsensical fraud claims before calling the election, why wait on Fujimori's? Gnerkistanislaviyort (talk) 04:39, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

There is absolutely no reason, nor precedent on Wikipedia to hold up an article, because of the complaints (that most sources say are frivolous) of one of the candidates. With that said, I think that most editors, like me, were waiting for the ONPE to finish counting and announce a winner. That has now happened, so the matter is over. Goodposts (talk) 16:57, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

PS. Should note that at this time, there is no official winner announcement, but the ONPE has declared that the verification of all ballots is complete and Castillo has a majority. That has been explained in the lede. Goodposts (talk) 17:00, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

References

The Article Must Reflect Reality

I am extremely surprised to see that, days after Castillo's victory, this article has not yet been updated to reflect the results. How can Wikipedia claim to have credibility when it ignores and refuses to report on the reality of the situation? Reliable sources have declared Castillo to be the winner of the election. The votes have been counted. His lead is insurmountable. What exactly are we waiting for? Is there something about this election, or this candidate, that is causing things to be handled differently than they would be for any other election? Any insight people have would be appreciated.

Edit request: Typo on infobox

In the infobox, on the lines containing: "| First round results by deparments (left) and provinces (right)" and "|Second round results by deparments (left) and provinces (right)", please change "deparments" to "departments". Thanks! " GonGorf (talk) 00:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

This already seems to have been done as I can't find the error in question. Number 57 11:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

99.99 % and not yet a winner?

I know that we have discussed this above... But I think that now it's ridiculous not have the winner declared. It's 99.99% of votes counted... Greek Rebel (talk) 11:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

By all means complain to the ONPE. Number 57 11:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

This article needs to be updated.

This article needs to be updated. Here are some headlines from the last 24 hours as of 17:00, 16 June 2021 (UTC):

DW: Peru elections: Leftist Castillo claims election victory despite right- wing pushback 14 hours ago

The Guardian: Peru election: socialist Pedro Castillo claims victory ahead of official result 16 hours ago

Reuters: Peru leftist Castillo claims election win as Fujimori fights result 14 hours ago

Dagme (talk) 17:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

What needs updating? The intro already states that "The official count of the second round indicated that Castillo won 50.12% of valid votes, a lead of 44,058 over Fujimori, but an official outcome is yet to be declared by the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE)." Number 57 17:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Map colors...

I don't know about others, but I personally find the elctoral map's color scheme - with various shades of red and orange - rather hard to follow....To be clear, I'm not color blind, and actually have quite good color vision, but red and orange are similar colors, and when there are different shades of each it makes it rather difficult and tedious to see what's what. I would imagine that for some others it's even more difficult.

I'd suggest instead using different shades of more completely different colors - e.g. red and blue or green and orange - with each being shaded from light to dark, depending on the margin of victory. -2003:CA:8748:5C22:FDD1:B1DA:28BC:6405 (talk) 20:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

The problem is that these are the party colours. Different colours wouldn't work. Number 57 20:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's an explicit Wikipedia policy requiring the use of official party colors. The use of orange and red certainly aren't ideal, but even if this overall framework has to be maintained, it would still be possible, IMO, to improve the shading within each color....As it is right now, the regions with a higher margin of victory for Fujimori use a redder shade of orange, which makes no sense at all!

So I would propose then (assuming the red/orange framework is maintained) to have the highest margin Castillo regions be deep red, with it then incrementally shaded with more white (towards pink) as the margin decreases. Likewise, the highest margin Castillo regions would be shaded as solid full orange, while lower margin regions would be incrementally shaded with more and more white mixed in (towards peach) as the margin decreases. -2003:CA:8748:5C22:FDD1:B1DA:28BC:6405 (talk) 21:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Erinthecute: FYI. Number 57 08:25, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

There is no specific policy I'm aware of that requires the use of the parties' respective official colours, that's more of a precedent for clarity. However, Wikipedia guidelines suggest that anything that could lower the encyclopaedic value of the content can be disregarded. So, if the colours are too close together and appear confusing to too many readers, I believe there wouldn't be much of an issue with changing them. The question then becomes what colours can instead be substituted, that wouldn't in turn cause even more confusion. Goodposts (talk) 15:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Updated vote tally

The vote tally on the ONPE website has been updated to show 8,835,653 votes for Castillo (50.125%) and 8,791,696 votes for Fujimori (49.875%), a difference of 43,957 votes, so I kindly ask that in the article lede, the phrase "a lead of 44,058 over Fujimori" be changed to "a lead of 43,957 over Fujimori," that the vote totals in the infobox be updated to reflect these new ONPE figures, and that the 'Second round' portion of the table in the 'Results' section be updated with these figures, in addition to changing the number of valid votes in the table from "17,627,100" to "17,627,349," the number of invalid/blank votes from "1,229,516" to "1,229,287," and the total votes from "18,856,616" to "18,856,636." It appears that one of the annulled actas was deemed to be valid. Ajs2004 (talk) 05:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Media bias claims

There are some very strong claims being passed as factual regarding media bias. These claims may be reported, but I don't think we can rely on them as objective fact at this point. Keepcalmandchill (please ping in responses) (talk) 07:08, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Castillo has been declared the winner

This is long overdue. Castillo was declared the winner by multiple RSs on June 10th: TeleSUR. El Pais. ABC International. Chicago Tribune. El Caribe. El Nacional. Broad support for declaring him the winner on this talk page was expressed, but a small number of extended autoconfirmed users wanted to delay the result without consensus. They said to wait for the official ONPE results. The official ONPE tally concluded on June 15th. It found Castillo the winner with 50.13% of the won. Multiple RSs have confirmed that Castillo won per the ONPE results after June 15th: TeleSUR, Milenio, euronews, Independent, Yahoo, El Espectador, Telemundo. Anybody who wanted to wait on the ONPE results has got their results now: Castillo won. I have updated the lede accordingly. I have made this section here for any discussion, so that we can preempt any edit-warring. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 19:41, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Copied this from my reply on Talk:Pedro Castillo:

This is difficult due to WP:Verify. We must verify that Castillo is the winner using reliable sources. Though the election body (ONPE) has processed all votes, they did not declare an official winner and the interpretation of their raw data from a primary source would be original research, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Most reliable sources are using wording such as "presumed president-elect" to describe Castillo, so this would be the most accurate description as of now.

There you go.--WMrapids (talk) 04:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

You have it backwards. I am not using primary sources or appealing simply to the ONPE. My comment included multiple secondary RSs which have unambiguously declared Castillo as the winner both on June 10th and after June 15th. This has been the point for the last two weeks. A small number of users on this talk page have been saying to ignore the RSs and await on the ONPE results - it is those people who were breaking WP:NOR, as I mentioned multiple times in previous sections of this talk page as this discussion has gone on. Now we have both the ONPE results and multiple RSs reporting on those results and declaring unambiguously that Castillo has won the election.

Your point about the "presumed" verbiage is just wrong. The thirteen RSs that I have linked above explicitly declare Castillo as the winner with no such qualifiers. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 06:55, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Two of your 'reliable' sources are ones that are deprecated. You're also ignoring the fact that multiple other reliable sources note that Castillo has still not officially been declared the winner. As editors, we have to use our judgement to work out which reliable source best represents reality. As it stands, ones like this are the ones that do. I don't understand why you're so desperate to jump the gun on this? It seems almost certain that Castillo will be declared the winner, but with a small chance he won't I don't think we can say in Wikipedia's voice that he has definitely won. Number 57 08:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

@Combefere: So what reliable sources do we include and which ones do we discount? First, you include Telesur as a reliable source, which we can throw out per WP:RSP since Telesur is a deprecated source. Next, we must recognize how reliable sources describe Castillo's status differently. Al Jazeera (WP:GREL) describes Castillo as "Peru’s presumed president-elect", the Financial Times says "Castillo ... appears to have won", Reuters (WP:GREL) says "Castillo ... is on the cusp of winning" and "The result of the ballot ... has not been formally announced by electoral authorities" and lastly BBC (WP:GREL) accurately writes "The independent body in charge of declaring a winner is the National Elections Jury (JNE), not the ONPE". As for other sources, Americas Quarterly intentionally describes Castillo as "Peru’s Likely Next President" in an article published just days ago. Seeing these descriptions, one can see that generally reliable sources – sources that Wikipedia users have recognized as being "reliable in most cases" – are not so sure on whether Castillo has won or not, thus there is not a consensus among reliable sources on whether he is the winner or not. It is more accurate and WP:NPOV to follow the example of the generally reliable sources that have not declared results as of yet.--WMrapids (talk) 08:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

In the case of having no consensus among RSs, we should prioritize - or at the very least consider - Peruvian RSs for a Peruvian election. Relying exclusively on English language US and European media outlets which have historically opposed and delegitimized left-wing leaders in Latin America is certainly not WP:NPOV. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 18:34, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Ultimately, the only RS for who has won the election is the ONPE. Please don't bring your own politics into this. Number 57 19:14, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Only one of the sources he linked to is considered 'deprecated' by WP standards. With that said, it is difficult to establish consensus without ONPE's official ruling. Couldn't we find a middle ground and agree that RS consider Castillo at least as presumed President-elect, much like what was done for Joe Biden back when he won the popular vote but before the Electoral College made the official selection (which had a very similar situation in that the outcome was practically guaranteed, but still technically subject to change), and refer to Castillo as 'presumed President-elect'? That seems like a good compromise that takes into account both positions. The 'presumed' tag can then be dropped later, if, as everyone is expecting, ONPE confirms him? Goodposts (talk) 22:13, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

• @Number 57: That is simply not true. Wikipedie does not take the Janurary 6 vote or the November count as the only RS for the Biden-Trump dispute, nor does Wikipeida took the official count of 2019 Bolivian general election as the only RS. Instead, Wikipedia prefers secondary sources (mass media) to primary sources (ONPE, final count, etc.). @Goodposts:More specifically, English Wikipedia strongly prefer western-based English sources to all others, and have a delicate "deprecated source" system which, in case of western media blaming RT, that'd be considered a RT "intentional disinformation" while in case of the non-west blaming western media (such as the evidentless Bolivian "fraud" which western media claims to be with "clear evidence"), that's just a "mistake" and should never be considered "disinformation" even if it results into a coup. There's a clear Anglo-American bias resulted from using promarily English sources. See Wikipedia:Systemic bias and ideological bias on Wikipedia.
• Talking about this specific article's inconsistentness with that of the US 2020 and of Bolivia 2019. It's due to the Peruvian establishment's consensus on the election handling as well as US establishment's. That's not a bad thing, until we realize Wikipedia's blatant disrespection of the Bolivian establishment's consensus on its 2019 election. All three Wikipedia articles are inconsistent with each other whatever we focus on corresponding country's domestic establishments or on final election results, but are consistent if we focus on western-based English media per WP:RS, i.e. Wikipedia does not make bias, but simply transport existing bias on western-based English media per its NPOV policy. Currently among English sources only left-leaning media like Democracy Now! openly call Castillo the winner, so as a Wikipedian per WP:RS and WP:NPOV I cannot help you even if I know obeying WP:NPOV (and WP:RS) would result in an Anglo-American bias.
• Ideally, Wikipedia (in whatever language) should refer to Quechuan, Aymaran and Spanish news sources when writing this article. Spanish news apparently will follow ONPE this time, but it doesn't seem to be the case of Quechuan and Aymaran news. Unfortunately I don't understand Quechuan or Aymaran (nor do others here I believe), so the systemic bias might has to persist. If anyone present here that both majority Quechuan and majority Aymaran sources calls Castillo the winner, I'd suggest proceeding to ITN immediately per WP:RS and WP:DUE (majority mass media of two Peruvian languages vs majority mass media of one Peruvian language). --173.68.165.114 (talk) 00:10, 29 June 2021 (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:

• Ballot paper – 2021 Peruvian presidential election.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:03, 30 June 2021 (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:

• Pedro Castillo.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:24, 27 July 2021 (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:

• Julio Guzmán.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:37, 26 April 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:

• Avanza País 2021.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:07, 9 July 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:

• Keiko Fujimori, Candidata Presidencial 2021.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 20 January 2023 (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:

• Keiko Fujimori, Candidata Presidencial 2021.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)