User:Raulcab/sandbox

Article evaluation (notes):

Main goal is to think critically about wiki sources.

What makes a good article?

The best are those that are featured.

"Start" or "Stub" class articles aren't considered as reliable, or simply don't provide a very strong overview of the topic.

Elements of quality articles:

Concise.

Neutral, no bias presented in the article.

Reliable sources are used throughout the article.

Elements of not-so-great articles:

The opposing of what is stated above.

Citations:

A key aspect of good articles is good sourcing. Everything you read on Wikipedia should come from a reliable source.

Everything you write on Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable source.

In general, you should be citing at least once per paragraph you contribute to Wikipedia, but any quotations, hard facts (such as statistics) and controversial claims

must be cited.

Good sources are those: Close paraphrasing:
 * Come from independent sources, that is, those not directly related to the subject.
 * Come from sources known for fact-checking and neutrality, such as academic presses, peer-reviewed journals, or international newspapers.
 * Come from reliable publishers, and represent a general consensus in the field (including significant minority points of view).

It is always best, to prevent close paraphrasing, to write everything in your own language.

Copyright:

Copyrighted materials, including lengthy passages from books, illustrations, and photographs, don't belong on Wikipedia. This is true even if you cite the material and

give proper credit to the author.

Reading history:

After you added a citation you can always check your work and others as well by going on the history.

Potential Articles:

Plebiscite

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plebiscite

I have grown a deep interest in plebiscites after hearing in class how Columbia used this voting system to resolve an issue. The article is very short and needs more sources. Although the article does indeed tell you what a Plebiscite is, i feel adding more examples and sources will make this article completely better.

Democracia digital (Digital Democracy)

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracia_digital

This article is the direct translation of Civic Tech, however though it is lengthy it still missing more sources. Thus, I can add more examples of civivc technologies that are being used around the world and translate them into spanish. So far only 5 examples of civic technology are listed in the article.

Democracia líquida (Liquid Democracy)

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracia_l%C3%ADquida#Democracia_4.0

This article does a very good job of explaining what liquid democracy is however it lacks examples.

Article Contribution to Arena Electoral

Knowing that there is no existing article for Arena Electoral, I seek to create this article to keep the 2012 Mexican platform as mainstream as possible. I will do this by defining what the platform was and what its ultimate goal was.
 * I first plan on describing and getting the platform notice
 * I will translate as much information as I can from Spanish to english
 * However I also know it is going to be a challenge as there isn't many sources that i have found so far.
 * Main goal is to obtain as many sources as possible to undergo this project.

Sources so far:

http://www.letraslibres.com/tag/arena-electoral

https://www.facebook.com/ArenaElectoral/

http://www.arenaelectoral.com

http://cidac.org/la-novatada-de-amlo-en-su-regreso-a-la-arena-electoral/ 4

"lead" section

Arena Electoral (2011) was an online platform created by Fundacion ethos to show the important process of the Mexican electoral in 2012 and whose main goal was to make citizens vote responsibly. The program was influenced by the necessity of making a better democracy; a democracy that is clean and transparent.

Arena Electoral
Arena Electoral was an online platform created by Fundación Ethos during the Mexican electoral process of 2012 to promote responsible voting. The project did this by simulating an online competition in which presdential candidates were given certain topics based on the Mexican national agenda and had to come up with a solution. After the candidates published their policies, the platform unanimously published them on their website and Mexican citizens were in charge of voting for the best policy. This allowed Mexican citizens to vote for the best policy maker instead of voting on the candidate based on party affiliations or other types of bias.

Background
The software was developed and designed by a much larger organization known as Fundación Ethos. Fundación Ethos is an international group of economists, lawyers, communicators, web designers, and political scientists, all who have experience in government and policy making. However, with its headquarters located in Mexico City, Mexico the organization mainly works to achieve its goals first in Mexico and Latin America.

Software
Arena Electoral 2.0 as it is currently known was developed and produced under Fundación Ethos.

Funding
The platform was created by a non-profit, independent and non-partisan organization that is financed by contributions from individuals and international organizations, with short contributions. Arena Electoral states that they do not provide any product in exchange for their services, do not give or sell pantries, hats, shirts or pictures for your car. They do not sell or give anything away, although they have considered to begin to sell t-shirts with their logo printed on them, for now nothing is sold on their site.

How it works
Arena Electoral launched a tool on the internet to find out if you have more affinity with the panista Josefina Vázquez Mota, PRI Enrique Peña Nieto, the standard bearer of the left Andrés Manuel López Obrador or the candidate of New Alliance Gabriel Quadri. In order to contribute to a better democratic exercise, the Ethos Foundation and the Electoral Arena launched the tool called Votomático. Under the premise that it is a citizen exercise and that the vote is free and secret, Votomático was not created to induce suffrage in favor of a specific party or candidate, but so that you know the proposals of the contenders to the Presidency and identify with which of your ideas you agree. The thing is like this: Votomatic are 25 simple questions around five major themes: security and justice; economic development; social development and the environment; human rights and State Reform, and Foreign Policy. Do not worry, the results are completely anonymous, unless you choose shared on social networks. The questionnaire in Votomático is multiple choice, and each question will give you five possible answers. You must select the one that most closely matches your way of thinking. This exercise emphasizes the differences between the candidates, but, of course, there are many other proposals in which they agree that they are not collected here. At the end of the exercise you can give more weight to some questions. This will help you to obtain new results according to the topics that are most important to you.

Votomatic will indicate which candidate you have the most affinity with in general, but you can also check with whom you have more in common by subject

Arena Electoral was an online platform created by Fundación Ethos during the Mexican electoral process of 2012 to promote responsible voting. The project did this by simulating an online competition in which all four presidential candidates: Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Enrique Peña Nieto, Josefina Vázquez Mota, and Gabriel Quadri, were given certain topics based on the Mexican national agenda and had to come up with a solution. After the candidates published their policies, the platform unanimously published them on their website and Mexican citizens were in charge of voting for the best policy. This allowed Mexican citizens to vote for the best policy maker instead of voting on the candidate based on party affiliations or other types of bias.

Background
The software was developed and designed by a much larger organization known as Fundación Ethos. Fundación Ethos is an international group of economists, lawyers, communicators, web designers, and political scientists, all who have experience in government and policy making. However, with its headquarters located in Mexico City, Mexico the organization mainly works to achieve its goals first in Mexico and Latin America.

Software
Arena Electoral 2.0 as it is currently known was developed and produced under Fundación Ethos.

Funding
The platform was created by a non-profit, independent and non-partisan organization that is financed by contributions from individuals and international organizations, with short contributions. Arena Electoral states that they do not provide any product in exchange for their services, do not give or sell pantries, hats, shirts or pictures for your car. They do not sell or give anything away, although they have considered to begin to sell t-shirts with their logo printed on them, for now nothing is sold on their site.

Principles
In its webpage Arena Electoral lists nine main principle in which they presumably aimed to follow and keep in order to have remained as neutral as possible. Their first principle and notice is that they were not in the business of giving out/selling items, pantries, hats, shirts or pictures for your car. Their second principle is in regards of advertising. Arena Electoral state that they did advertise in their site, but according to them it was only used as a necessity to pay for their "discrete" salaries. However, according to them they did not accept (nor will we ever accept) money or resources from candidates or companies that intentioned to modify Arena Electoral's opinions, analyzes, or evaluations based on their donations. Furthermore, in their third principle Arena Electoral address and talk about their allies. They claim that fortunately, there were many organizations allied to the platform. There were some partners who they previously had collaborated with and others who they state they only sympathized with. Arena Electoral say that they even got to know partners as well as a result of the platform, which accordingly allowed them to inform and spread their proposals. At the end of the section Arena Electoral make a disclaimer saying that the information that their partners decided to share in their platform was generated independently without the intervention of their own team or any of the other organizations that participated in the project, and as a result claimed that everyone was free and responsible to propose anything on the site.

APPARATUS We are a 100% nonpartisan and plural platform, so that no member of the team is allowed to participate directly in the campaign of any of the candidates we are evaluating. Obviously, each member of this team is free to have their affiliations, their phobias, their sympathies or antipathies for whomever they please.

CONDUCT We do not accept gifts from any of the candidates or their people. We will be even more explicit: We do not accept trips for special event coverage. Forget about offering to go to the Olympic Games in London, at last we did not even want to. We do not accept meals or gifts from the aforementioned actors or their representatives. We do not seek benefits, gifts, chambas or "bones", as well as any special treatment of candidates in case of reaching the Presidency of the Republic.

APPEARANCES IN MEDIA Some of the members of our team appear in the media, giving opinions or doing what they think. That is independent of this project since they are spokespersons of Arena Electoral only when they present themselves as such. CONFLICT OF INTERESTS Any member of the Arena Electoral team who has a husband or wife, boyfriend or girlfriend, partner or other close relationship with a candidate, or member of their team, will let you know in their personal information in the corresponding to this site. It will be valued according to its degree of closeness (with the candidate, not with the member of our team) and whether this collaborator can cover what concerns the candidate in question.

OPINIONS ON THE SITE If there are opinions or editorialized material on our platform, we will make it explicit that this is the case and that these respond to the point of view of the writer or editor of the note. Any opinion expressed in content that appears in the Electoral Arena will be the sole opinion of the person in question and should not be considered a formal opinion or supported by the Electoral Arena as a whole or the Electoral Arena or any of its associates in particular.

USE OF THE PAGE Users of the page are invited to make good use of it. We are not scared nor are we Puritans, but if the discussion forums use disrespect, aggression, insults and words that do not dignify the debate and democratic deliberation, we will see in the no painful need to eliminate these comments and even block the User who insists with the coarse and coarse "trolleys" (and do as you wish). These are the ethical (and final) principles that guide us and which we decide to follow, by our own decision. approved by everyone as a group. If there is any doubt about our ethics guide or about our professional conduct, you can contact us at info@arenaelectoral.com.

Improve voter turnout
One of the main goals of the platform was for it to improve voter turnout. Arena Electoral aimed to do this by.

Promote responsible voting
In order to promote responsible voting, Arena electoral created a tool within their platform called Votomático. Votomático was a questionnaire containing 25 questions, all based on five major themes: security and justice; economic development; social development and the environment; human rights and State Reform, and Foreign Policy. The results were anonymous, unless you chose to share them on social media. The questionnaire in Votomático was multiple choice and each question had five different answers. From those five answers you picked the one that most likely matched your way of thinking. After answering every question, according to Arena Electoral, the exercise would show which candidate you have the most affinity with. With Votomático Arena Electoral aimed to show citizens with which of the four presidential candidates they were more inclined to. However, according to Fundación Ethos the tool was not created to induce suffrage in favor of a specific candidate and/or political party. Instead, presumably Votomático was developed so citizens could know the proposals of the candidates and from that identify with whom they shared similar ideas.

Results
The final result showed Andrés Manuel López Obrador as the winner with 5.7. Enrique Peña Nieto, the current president of Mexico came in second with 5.2. Consequently, Josefina Vázquez Mota came in third with 4.4 and with the lowest score came in Gabriel Quadric with 2.8.

Legacy
Currently, Arena Electoral is still up and running and now serves as an informative site that still, according to them, aims to explain to citizens the power of voting and its importance, all while guiding in what is needed to express this right in Mexico or abroad. Nonetheless, the site still contains all previous articles, editorials, related texts and past proposals of the previous candidates.