Talk:National Electoral Council (Venezuela)

Requested move

Consejo Nacional Electoral (Venezuela) → National Electoral Council (Venezuela) - use the English name per WP:NC(UE) - Spaceriqui 21:10, 20 January 2006 (UTC) copied from the entry on the WP:RM page

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• I removed the voting section since it should be straight forward per WP policy. If anyone objects, lets discuss first. Spaceriqui 21:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

• As stated this follows WP:NC(UE), so it shouldn't be controversial. It's good to see others not using voting sections when not necessary! --Lox (t,c) 21:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo CNE.jpg

Image:Logo CNE.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Chavista bias in CNE

Does anyone want to address the allegations of pro-Chavez bias in the membership of the CNE? From what I understand, CNE members are not allowed by law to be from any political party (or signed any petition against Chavez). This would be fine, except that anyone from Chavez's PSUV party is exempted from this rule. There are also allegations, based on statistics, that the CNE packs election stations with pro-Chavez militants, at a higher rate than their actual occurrence in the local populations. While this doesn't mean that any cheating has occurred, it is disturbing. Snookumz (talk) 02:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you have reliable sources supporting that? JRSP (talk) 02:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

"it often aids the Maduro Government in fraud to manipulate the will of the Venezuelan People."

Alright, let's look at the citations then.

First source: The Moonie Times says "While they decried the government’s tactics, MUD leaders had been careful not to cast doubt upon the election. Opposition leader Julio Borges, president of the disenfranchised National Assembly, had noted on Sunday afternoon that Election Day had gone smoothly except for minor “incidents.”" Nothing about fraud.

Second source: the notoriously impartial Voice of America. Also nothing about fraud, except a mention of a tweet that used "fraudulent" as a four letter word and VOA describing it as the "pro-Maduro election board" (in the country where the options are "the ruling party" and "the conspiracy theorists who openly demand a foreign invasion of their own country").

Third source: right-wing Spanish newspaper quoting... an organ of the Catholic Church. I have poor understanding of this situation and Google searches aren't bringing up anything about a recount in Bolivar or 200,000 missing votes in Miranda, so let's just be safe and say the article is 100% accurate; unless the claims of the opposition were independently verified and found to be a result of fraud, this phrasing isn't NPOV. I don't care if every newspaper in the world is saying one thing, these claims of fraud have never been verified by numerous independent election monitors who don't shy away from saying a lot of negative things about the elections, whether or not they act like they have been, and it would be better to say "some claim" or whatever.

Fourth source: the Secretary General of the OAS hurling accusations without citing anyone.

Really? With everyone saying this constantly, you'd think there'd be better secondary or primary sources. The BBC sounds the same. CNN sounds the same. Couldn't dig anything up from there? I'm editing this out. This page seems like a good candidate for being locked. 172.59.17.142 (talk) 15:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Update: it seems like this was modified while I wrote this up. 172.59.17.142 (talk) 15:31, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Website attacked

The CNE website was apparently attacked around the day of the presidential election, per the Public Ministry. Boud (talk) 22:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Supplementary rectors

It seems that in addition to the "main" five rectors (rectoras y rectores principales) there are also ten supplementary rectors (rectoras y rectores suplentes). This should be added, based on a proper WP:RS. As of August 2023, the ten supplementary rectors are listed at Acceso A La Justicia (archive). Boud (talk) 12:11, 27 August 2024 (UTC)