Talk:2006 Panama Canal expansion referendum

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Central America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Central America 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.Central AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Central AmericaCentral America articles

Elections and Referendums

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.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Untitled

The outgoing link "Information About Canal Expansion - Opposition to the project" goes to a Tripod hosted site that is in Spanish. Is this a credible or appropriate link? - Tic Tac Addict

Voting Percentage

77.8% + 22.2% + 1.9% = 101.9% ?? ARC Gritt 13:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hehe... thats kind of funny. Also, is it really that necissary to have a chart that shows the percentage of votes? I think its a little over the top... --LocalBandAid02 14:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. The unofficial results in the Electoral Tribunal in here include only the percentage of the two options, and the valid/blank/null votes in a table next to it. Thanks for noticing it!. The graph/chart is not absolutely necessary, it was made in the french wikipedia version but I like it because it shows a visual representation of the difference between the two options. The table over the graph shows the percentage of polling stations counted and the low voter turnout. This data has to be changed once the official results are available. Radioheadhst 21:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

notability

is this really notable when there's a whole article for 'Panama Canal expansion'? i know it 'works' now but imagine in 10 years the problems facing wikipedia - potentially - by this habit.

Whoever wrote the comment above needs to sign his comment. --F3meyer 16:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Application of a notability test to a series of articles like this is not appropriate. More time is needed to allow this series about Panamanian elections to be fleshed out. Another approach would be to put all of the elections into one article and then separate them later as more information is added about each election. Still there is nothing wrong with being patient. --F3meyer 16:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with having an article for every election and referendum. —Nightst a llion (?) 16:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

Can someone explain to me how the previous name, Panama Canal expansion referendum, 2006 wasn't clear or precise enough and why it had to be moved to Panamanian Panama Canal expansion referendum, 2006 ?? -- Chuq (talk) 13:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with you! I find redundant to add "Panamanian" to the article name, there isn't another Panama Canal located in another country so its unnecessary to clarify it like that. I changed it back. Radioheadhst^talk? 08:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- On October 23, someone changed the title back, saying it is "the correct name". This doesn't seem very substantial. "Even" the Spanish article doesn't include the redundant adjective. I'll move it back. Nethency (talk) 12:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of Arms of Panama.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Coat of Arms of Panama.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:47, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]