Jump to content

Talk:Jeanine Áñez

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Qphilo (talk | contribs) at 00:41, 14 November 2019 (What is her political position, on anything?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

She has no right to declare herself president of Bolivia

The article claims "she became the highest-ranking official in the line of succession to the presidency of Bolivia" but that's simply untrue. According to ARTICLE 161.3 of Bolivia's Constitution "The Chambers shall meet in Pluri-National Legislative Assembly to [...] To accept or reject the resignation of the President of the State and of the Vice President of the State." This did NOT happen as they didn't have quorum to hold sessions. Thus the president still IS Evo Morales, even after signing his resignation. This needs to be corrected as soon as possible. Wikipedia is a place to INFORM the truth, not to assert one's opinion on a matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NausAllien (talkcontribs) 19:37, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Senator

Does she cease to be a senator when she takes on this interim presidency ? Will she automatically return to being a senator afterwards, does anyone know ? -- Beardo (talk) 03:12, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Technicalities not laid out in the Bolivian constitution, possibly because it's a very unlikely scenario (the instructions on what to do specifically stop at the 3rd in line of succession, she's 5th). So she'll be developing the precedent as she goes along. So, no, we don't know. Kingsif (talk) 04:03, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is her political position, on anything?

We are told "Her politics have been described as fiercely anti-Evo Morales". That tells me very little at all. They could be in the same party, and just happen to hate each other. Can someone pelase make this a little better? HiLo48 (talk) 06:59, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Use a translator here; https://twitter.com/JeanineAnez

Mr.User200 (talk) 12:54, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This page appears to have been written almost exclusively by her supporters, and should be considered suspect by Wikipedia standards. Qphilo (talk) 00:41, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

81st President or not

Is she the President of Bolivia or not? Enough with this claims to be stuff. GoodDay (talk) 16:11, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, per @Mewulwe:'s lead, we should leave out the numbering (81st) as it can't be sourced. GoodDay (talk) 22:53, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Per the line of succession, she immediately becomes President. The constitution does not outline whether it is in an acting capacity or if she must call elections; it implies that she does not. The number is apparently controversial, as different counts include different people (you really think they would keep a list, but alas, there does not seem to be one). The Wikipedia article places her 68th. Leave out a number if the content is in dispute. Kingsif (talk) 00:52, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
According to multiple sources, she's declared herself "interim President". Apparently doing so even though the Senate lacked a quorum to appoint her. — Red XIV (talk) 06:38, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2019

The section that reads "Due to the military's involvement in the resignations, the events have been called a coup d'état by several critics." is somewhat incorrect. The military was at no point involved in his resignation. The protests were started and lead by civic leaders the all 21 days of protest. Near the end the only thing the military did was suggest his resignation to appease the people. All the police and military said during the period of protest was that they would not raise their guns against the population which does not really qualify as "involvement in the resignation." Due to this I recommend changing the section that says "due to military's involvement in the resignation" to "despite the lack of the military's involvement in the resignation" Sammyender (talk) 01:05, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2019

Please change the picture to the current picture of her as the President of Bolivia.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Jeanine_A%C3%B1ez_-_Interim_President_of_Bolivia.jpg CurrentEventsBO (talk) 05:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also should mention that she became the interim president without achieving a quorum, thus balancing MAS's illegimate claim and Jeanine's "emergency and just interim" claim. --146.96.147.137 (talk) 09:33, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated it while checking it out based on an additional quality improvement, but with extreme prejudice to delete if the CC tag proves to be false. As in, there's a copyright claim in the description - sometimes people (C) but have allowed for CC use, but it's not always the case. @146.96.147.137: where did you get the image from? Kingsif (talk) 12:06, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Found it: that's not free. It may qualify as fair use, but it's headed to be deleted on commons. Kingsif (talk) 12:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Political Views - Indigenous People

Holds that indigenous are satanic and shouldn't be living in cities: https://www.google.com/search?biw=1660&bih=830&tbm=isch&sxsrf=ACYBGNTd4NOvi0hIWrAQrzty5CtclHbVwQ%3A1573673833313&sa=1&ei=aVvMXebcEs6WsQWeurq4Ag&q=bolivian+coup+d%27etat+indigenous+satanic+twitter&oq=bolivian+coup+d%27etat+indigenous+satanic+twitter&gs_l=img.3...1903.2712..2793...0.0..0.434.1164.0j2j2j0j1......0....1..gws-wiz-img.FYauFzZ1pYk&ved=0ahUKEwimtc7u9-flAhVOS6wKHR6dDicQ4dUDCAc&uact=5#imgrc=0dtz5rWy9F_i0M: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.15.34.9 (talk) 19:42, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous assertion that Evo Morales banned Catholicism is currently in this semi-locked entry.

Whoever posted that should lose their editing privileges. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:DD16:2C00:E8C4:46A2:EE50:E62E (talk) 22:34, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the citation refutes it. The guardian article says Morales supported removing references to Catholicism from Bolivia's constitution. The Wikipedia article says Morales banned Catholicism. Obviously a deliberate falsehood inserted into the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derelanian (talkcontribs) 23:05, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This clearly wasn't supported by the source so I removed it. If someone wants to re-add a description of how the Bolivian was secularized under Morales, including the claim from the Guardian article about the Bible being banned from the presidential palace, you should probably find another source that goes into more detail. Zrowny (talk) 23:35, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstated with only the basics; note that assertions of "deliberate falsehood" is not WP:AGF - I wrote it intending to paraphrase the Guardian so as not to get close to copyvio of a strong source, don't assume malintent. Kingsif (talk) 23:59, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]