Talk:Philippine general election, 2010

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Elections and Referendums  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
 
WikiProject Tambayan Philippines (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

SWS poll[edit]

I've added an SWS poll. Also, this talk page needs to be archive so if no one objects I'll go ahead with the archive. --Howard the Duck 09:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I concur with the move to archive the discussion. What do others think? -- Alternativity (talk) 14:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Concur. Posting the opinion poll would be the great start of this article that was heavily debated and let's move on. I hope they would be satisfied with this already. -- Kevin Ray (talk) 05:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Archives done. --Howard the Duck 05:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Notice for Aspiring Politicians[edit]

Please don't turn this into a campaign site. Alexius08 (talk) 07:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

We will assure you Alexius08 that we would thwart anyone planning to make this article biased and impartial. I hope that you could also join us in making this article better and preserve this in line with Wikipedia's standards. - Kevin Ray (talk) 08:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, Alexius08 (talk), please do. This one will need all our help. Alternativity (talk) 10:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I've just began monitoring this page for 2010. All biased and impartial posts will be deleted. Alexius08 (talk) 04:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Issues[edit]

Guys, does anyone know of any articles specifically attaching specific issues to this campaign? I still insist that the wiki for this must have neutral coverage of issues and not just coverage of personalities. The problem is, media coverage tends towards personalities so it's hard to get references... Alternativity (talk) 10:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

There are no issues YET since everyone is embroiled in the ZTE mess. --Howard the Duck 10:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Uh-huh. Yeah, I suppose so. I'm a bit surprised, though, that no parties have used the ZTE mess as a starting point for identifying key issues for 2010. But then of course, people seem to be wondering if 2010 is going to happen at all, and that might be at the root of it. Sigh. Oh well. I will be waiting for the SWS surveys that list people's reasons for making a choice for president.Alternativity (talk) 12:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Error on Mar Roxas' poll numbers[edit]

I had just corrected an error on the SWS Survey showing Senator Mar Roxas with 60% instead of 9% in September 2007. -- Kevin Ray (talk) 05:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Poll in article showing Estrada with a 9% following[edit]

Why is Estrada listed in the poll as a possible option for voters to select in 2010? The Philippine Constitution is clear that one may not be elected president more than once.J.J. Bustamante (talk) 07:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Er... I believe the article just quotes the source in this case. The article is not actually saying that Erap is running or is constitutionally allowed to run, but is saying, instead, that the polls list Erap as an option. At this point, I think the "Erap running" issue merits a subheading in this article. I just don't quite have the time to make one. Perhaps you'd like to have a go at it, [[User:JesuXPIPassio|J.J. Bustamante]? I think it would really help make the article clearer. It's simply a matter of finding the relevant sources. (In this case, I think it will be necessary to find a printed quote from some constitutional expert regarding whether or not Erap can run. But since so many such experts have already given their opinion, I doubt finding sources will be a problem. Alternativity (talk) 16:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Added a new section regarding this. Hope I've made it neutral enough. --Edward Sandstig (talk) 22:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Center for Philippine Futuristic Studies[edit]

The problem with opinion polls unlike exit polls, the former is just a very very hazy picture of the future, while the latter, conducted on the day of the election, is a rather very very close picture of the result. At any rate, money is involved here. The SWS and Pulse Asia Polls, are now REPEALED OR REVISED by this LATEST poll on the race: Center for Philippine Futuristic Studies, a political futurist, led by Antonio Gatmaitan, head of the research outfit, Political Economic Applied Research Foundation, surveyed that: "The 2010 presidential elections will likely be a 5-way race among Vice-President Noli de Castro, Senate President Manuel Villar, Senator Loren Legarda, Senator Manuel Mar Roxas, and former President Joseph Estrada, in case he qualifies. And in case De Castro doesn’t get the support of the administration, the Lakas-KAMPI alliance will have a dark horse candidate; the 9 other "early frontliners" for May 2010 are: Senators Francisco Pangilinan, Francis Escudero, Richard Gordon, Gregorio Honasan, and Panfilo Lacson; Makati City Mayor Jejomar Binay; Quezon City Mayor Feliciano Belmonte; Metro Manila Development Authority Chair Bayani Fernando; and Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro.Gatmaitan also stated that the 5 candidates can be competitive in the 3 arenas where the 2010 electoral battle will be fought:

1) battle of the airwaves (50% of the contest); 2) ground level war (35% of the battle); and, 3) cyberspace, (15%)".Abs-Cbn Interactive, 2010 polls a 5-way race—forecast --Florentino floro (talk) 05:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually opinion polls are rather accurate in the States but not that quite here, because perhaps the official results can be easily manipulated. --Howard the Duck 06:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I partly agree, since SWS was the most unreliable and so corrupt, during the FPJ surveys. It confessed mea culpa, its error for PGMA of 10%. SWS is prone to election corruption. But it has the best comparable to USA, were it not for greed and lust for money. This futuristic I added has not been heard but will try to join the corrupt election ... So, I added this one now:*2010 candidates start organizing --Florentino floro (talk) 11:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to split articles for the Presidential, Senate, House, Gubernatorial and Local Elections[edit]

Let's follow the US elections articles so we write specific results for the five elections Rizalninoynapoleon (talk) 12:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Considering this is practically empty we'd have to wait for the time the article gets long enough to warrant a split. --Howard the Duck 13:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Maybe during the elections itself? Rizalninoynapoleon (talk) 10:16, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Not really; maybe even earlier, as long as the article gets long enough. --Howard the Duck 13:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
The proposal is timely and if the split is done, the result is obviously positive. Why not ask User:Anyo Niminus to join this discussion, since he has created templates on Philippine articles. He made most of Supreme Court Justices' bios. It is, however, at this point of time (with very few links and meats) difficult to create good splits on this. However, stubs are not bad articles, can be, though. --Florentino floro (talk) 08:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
If there is enough material, there can even be articles about local elections. See Talk:Philippine general election, 2007, the very first discussion. --Howard the Duck 13:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I have got a good idea to keep the article but the rest of the article could be several parts that will lead to each specific article like the United States general elections, 2008 Rizalninoynapoleon (talk) 14:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
This article won't be blanked or be made practically empty once the sections are spun off to their daughter articles. –Howard the Duck 15:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
I received a suggestion[1]. Accordingly, I you please, deeply consider amending, expanding, editing - the Philippine general election, 2010 to something patterned after the United States general elections, 2008 because is it not better to have specific for articles for the positions up for grabs - Presidential, House, Senate and Gubernatorial; Vide - Category:2008 elections in the United States - United States general elections, 2008 - United States presidential election, 2008 -List of elections in the United States Cheers.--Florentino floro (talk) 11:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Let's just do it and separate them, I'll get local election results in 2007 from the COMELEC, I'll be in charge of Region 4 A and B --Norman18 (talk) 7:54, 24 March 2009
Doesn't it sound like an obtuse idea to split an article about a single electoral event which took place in a single Election Day into several articles, just to be able to look at separate reports with the results? C'mon, there's a lot of real work to do in this encyclopedia, to waste time and effort doing something that will require more time and effort from the readers!!! --AVM (talk) 21:24, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

This is a proposal to merge article Philippine presidential election, 2010 into this one.

Both articles refer to the same electoral event, even if said event will have results of different nature. Moreover, the texts, as they are (April 2009) do not differ significantly. --AVM (talk) 21:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Bad idea, as this 2010 elections will focus not only on the Presidency but also on the congressional elections especially when the House of Representatives will be increased from 250 to 300 after a Supreme Court ruling on partylist representatives 58.69.80.70 (talk) 14:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
The presidential election would be split off anyway in the foreseeable future, same with the Congressional elections so I don't see the point. –Howard the Duck 18:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Oppose, as this article refers to the general election of the whole country, including the Senate elections, local and gubernational. Harel (Not what you think?) 02:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

COMELEC[edit]

WAS IT SUCCESSFULLY MADE DURING THE ELECTION IN ONE PART OF OUR COUNTRY PARTICULARLY IN MAGUINDANAO,PHILIPPINES —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.104.222 (talk) 12:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

The Election was still on going as of today (May 10). Harel (Not what you think?) 01:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Notable local elections[edit]

I guess it's safe to create articles for the following races:

You can add some more... –Howard the Duck 12:02, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Opinion?[edit]

Removed comment from IP fanboys. (Wikipedia is not a forum) Moray An Par (talk) 12:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


I believe you are just concern about the next generation and the country. Thanks for your opinion but Wikipedia is not for opinion. There are open forums in the internet to express your opinion. Have a nice day! Election day! May 10, 2010.

Harel (Not what you think?) 01:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Request for page protection[edit]

Vandalism is getting rampant imo. --Robert Adrian Dizon (talk) 13:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Jay Sonza having 5 million votes?[edit]

IMBA! I though Loren Legarda was ahead of him. Is this vandalism or the real vote count?

Harel (Not what you think?) 10:35, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

OUTDATED ARTICLE - Please update![edit]

This article is badly in need of an overall update. Por example, it says "The elected president will become the 15th President of the Philippines..." etc.

Well, Benigno S. Aquino III is the proclaimed President of the Philippines since June 30, 2010, and almost EIGHT months later the text is still in the future tense. This situation is often repeated along the article.

--AVM (talk) 17:59, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

This article has been neglected in favor of the more detailed daughter articles. Why not do it yourself if it's as simple as changing tenses? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:11, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Hah! I reserve my spare time for more worthy causes, thank you. --AVM (talk) 21:30, 27 June 2012 (UTC)