Talk:Second impeachment and removal of Martín Vizcarra

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

Move to draft[edit]

I've moved this to draft so that it can be worked on to restore the sources. In mainspace it appears to be a serious BLP problem with no sourcing at all. Also, from the edit history this appears to be an autotranslation? If so, it needs someone to check the translation is accurate before restoring to mainspace. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:10, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of two articles[edit]

I am requesting that this article be merged with the article explaining the first impeachment process against Vizcarra. J4lambert (talk) 22:00, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this needs to be done. This article entirely fails to tell the reader why Vizcarra was impeached, beyond making unexplained assertions about 'knowing the singer Richard Swing'. If there is a logical reason why there needs to be a second article on a continuing process - impeachment - it is anything but obvious. Keep it all together, so we can actually understand what happened... 109.159.88.9 (talk) 23:49, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨

Requested move 13 November 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Removal of Martín Vizcarra → Impeachment of Martín Vizcarra – Impeachment has been the proper term in such cases, per article's lead itself and similar instances (Impeachment of Bill Clinton, Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff, etc). Brandmeistertalk 15:21, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I had the page as that initially, following the style of Impeachment of Donald Trump, but it got moved to some other awkwardly sounding article title. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨
  • Support per nomination. "Impeachment of..." is certainly the apt form. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:48, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: I think I said on another talk page that I do not support this, but after further evaluation I support the merge. We can make separate sections for each vote in order to consolidate the articles.--WMrapids (talk) 08:40, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose he was technically removed, impeached is a slang term, i disagree with this RPM Gameshowandsportsfan2007 (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment @Gameshowandsportsfan2007: He was convicted/removed, but the scope of the article is encompassing the entire process that led up to the removal (the initiating impeachment proceedings vote, inquiry, investigations, context) so impeachment is the more general term. Dilma Rousseff and Park Geun-hye were both removed from office, but the article names reflect the entire proceedings. DoctorSpeed ✉️ ✨
  • Struck !vote of block-evading sockpuppet. Eagles 24/7 (C) 22:23, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. He was removed from office, not merely impeached. The Rousseff article should be moved; the Clinton and Trump articles are fine. We could go with "impeachment and removal" for clarity, but the difference between acquittal and conviction is rather important, surely. Srnec (talk) 17:27, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as unnecessary, since as noted in the section above this, there is no logical reason (or at least, none so far provided) as to why there are two articles on a single continuing process. Merge everything into a single article, and then decide what to call it. Fiddling around with titles meanwhile only hides the more serious issue - which is that this article fails to tell the readers what caused the impeachment/removal in the first place. 109.159.88.9 (talk) 18:04, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I am striking my above "support" vote and replacing it with "oppose", having realized that there was already an article, created September 12 as "Impeachment process against Martín Vizcarra", which was moved seven weeks later (November 3) to "First impeachment process against Martín Vizcarra". The article under discussion was created a week later (November 10) as "Impeachment of Martín Vizcarra" and moved the same day to "Second impeachment process against Martín Vizcarra" and, two days later (November 12) to "Removal of Martín Vizcarra". Thus, the nomination is implicitly contemplating the presence of two seemingly duplicative main title headers — the existing "First impeachment process against Martín Vizcarra" and the proposed "Impeachment of Martín Vizcarra". —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:09, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose. See: First impeachment process against Martín Vizcarra. There were two impeachments against Martín Vizcarra. Both are distinct processes, each occurred for different reasons and maintained its own debate and vote in Congress. The move to "Impeachment of Martín Vizcarra" will make the title ambiguous. --Fontaine347 (talk) 21:18, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Fontaine347, Roman Spinner, and Srnec: Could we consolidate both articles into the Removal of Martín Vizcarra article? There could be two main sections discussing each impeachment vote, a main section about the vote for vacancy and then the article is ultimately how he was removed. Links to the main sections can be used on other articles, redirects or projects as well. Then Impeachment of Martín Vizcarra could redirect to the Removal of Martín Vizcarra article. Just an idea.--WMrapids (talk) 06:06, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would oppose retention of the form "Removal of..." simply because such main title headers appear to be extremely rare in relation to removal from office (Removal of Ratu Mara, 2000). There are, however, a number of headers using the form "Impeachment of..." which is understood to mean both "Impeachment and removal of..." as well as "Impeachment and non-removal of..." in the same manner that headers "Shooting of..." are understood to mean "Fatal shooting of..." as well as "Non-fatal shooting of..." The majority of, but not all, impeachments result in removal in the same manner that a large majority of, but not all, shootings result in death. Any revision of these arrangements should be made on the basis of a mass nomination, rather than of single non-conforming proposal. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 17:56, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:17, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:41, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Second_impeachment_and_removal_of_Martín_Vizcarra&oldid=1208322923"