Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Colombia

Add topic
Active discussions
Wikiprojflag.png
WikiProject Colombia (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Colombia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Colombia-related articles 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.
Project This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Colombian House of RepresentativesEdit

The article on the Colombian House of Representatives states that there are 172 seats in the infobox along with showing the breakdown of to whom those seats belong. However in the subsection for Electoral System, the chamber is described as "currently composed of 166 representatives serving four-year terms." The table in the bottom of the section breaks down the parties represented and their respective number of seats, with a total of 166 listed.

I don't know anywhere near enough about the body to know which is accurate (or are both somehow accurate, e.g. 166 voting members and 6 nonvoting members, for a total of 172, certainly no clarification like this is described in the article), but I figured I would bring this to the attention of the fine volunteer editors who may be able to fix this discrepancy.

link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamber_of_Representatives_of_Colombia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:580:C200:1B0:88B8:4C46:4AE4:C3BC (talk) 04:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

See note (b) next to the number of "172" in the infobox – it's complicated, and still disputed, but basically there are 166 elected members, and then as part of the current peace process the FARC automatically got five additional seats, and the President got to choose an extra seat. Richard3120 (talk) 19:03, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

A related query as I've been trying to add more detailed results of Congressional elections – one thing that's unclear is how the indigenous and Afro-Colombian seats are elected. Do eligible voters have to chose between voting for a candidate in the general seats and one in the minority seats, or can they vote for candidates in both? The way the results are presented by sources is inconsistent – the RNEC presentation in some cases suggests a vote for the minority seats is an additional vote (as they don't include votes cast for the minority seats in the total figure used to calculate voter turnout), and in others suggests that it is a standalone vote (by including them).

I also can't find anything that explains how voters qualify to vote for the indigenous or Afro-Colombian seats. Cheers, Number 57 19:18, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I live in Colombia, and voted in the last Congressional elections... and there wasn't an option for me on the ballot paper to vote for an indigenous party, as far as I remember. I need to look into this, because I find it very difficult to follow the histories of the smaller parties – apart from the half dozen or so major parties, the smaller ones often seem to only be in existence for one set of elections and then disappear, or they get renamed, or they merge with another party, or they form an alliance with a different name from any of the parties in the alliance. Richard3120 (talk) 20:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web toolEdit

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

First women in CongressEdit

I've found several sources claiming that Anacarsis Cardona de Salonia and María Paulina Nieto de Caro were the first women to sit in the Chamber of Representatives. However, this official source of members of the Chamber (see pp6–7) lists nine women as principal members (Cardona, Margarita Córdoba de Solórzano, Bertha Hernández de Ospina, Alina Muñoz de Zambrano, Nieto de Caro, Carmenza Rocha Castilla, Teresa Santamaría, Isabel Vall-Serra and María Luisa Velásquez). Does anyone have any idea why the two mentioned above are considered the first and not the other seven? Cheers, Number 57 19:48, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

No, no idea... the 1958 election was the first one where women were allowed to be elected to Congress, so obviously it was all nine or none at the same time. The only thing I can think of is that they wee the first two to be sworn in. Richard3120 (talk) 17:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
I found an article about Córdoba de Solórzano that stated she was a second substitute who only took her seat after the principal was appointed to another position and the first substitute died. I wonder if the 'official list' is that at a certain point after the election, by which time several of the substitute had become principles? I found another rather confusing source, this article, which backs up the list of nine (p40), although it goes on to state 8 on p45 and then only lists seven of them on p46 (excluding Cardona de Salonia and adding Cecilia Lince). Hmmm Number 57 18:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

HiEdit

Hi. I just checked the page White Colombians and I see user Merchancano has completely vandalised the page. It was complete and full of information last time I checked.

This user has been inflating the number of Afro Colombians and apparently reducing the number of White Colombians. Don't know what's the motive behind this.

According to him, anybody who is part African or have a fraction of Sub-Saharan ancestry even if it is as low as 15% of their ADN, counts as 'Afro-Colombian' but then again, he says people who are 60% or more European (genetic-wise) can't be 'white Colombians'. Check the page's history, that's what he says. So he has double standards for the figures he wants to impose.

He's been editing all pages related to Colombian ethnic groups (English and Spanish) and selling the idea of an Afro Colombia. Crazy thing.

I don't know if you could please help me out raise awareness about this and take some actions if possible. I'm no expert at Wikipedia but I think this user has an agenda. He's not happy with inflating Afro Colombian numbers, he also goes and vandalises other ethnicities' pages, like the one dedicated to White Colombians.

He also deletes content instead of asking for references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opita garzon (talkcontribs) 02:19, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

I haven't checked, so I don't know what figures he is using. The only official figures are the ones from the 2018 census by DANE – I think the black and Afrocolombian population was given as about 6.6% of the population, but if you include "raizales" and "Palenqueros" then this rises to 9.34% of the population. Anything else is original research, i.e. the editor's own opinion, and not based on verifiable evidence. Thanks for letting us know. Richard3120 (talk) 02:38, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sourcesEdit

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

  • John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)