The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
A news item involving 2018 Venezuelan presidential election was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 21 May 2018. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The process so far has ton of irregularities in its process that should be explained in the article and translated from the Spanish Wikipedia. I'd love to give a hand if needed. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 14:06, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a particular reason to use blue as the color to identify Falcón? Blue is strongly associated with MUD and Falcón is not a MUD candidate. In Spanish orange it’s been use for him as is one of the colors of his party’s flag. Also in the case of Bertolucci green may be more suitable as his campaign logo uses a lot of it. -- Dereck Camacho ( talk) 23:00, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
May I ask why, on the map of international recognition of different presidents, one is red and one is green? The choice of those two colours is easy to read as bias. Perhaps more neutral colours should be used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CC62:6A00:CD7A:D3D6:7732:C1DB ( talk) 12:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
I just wanted to let know those interested that the electoral campaign started two days ago and that it will be 26 days long. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 23:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
All lot of these NGOs are led by the Venezuelan opposition.
Foro Penal provided free legal assistance to those involved in the
2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt against Hugo Chavez (see their article) and
Súmate is funded by the US government and is led by
María Corina Machado, a member of the anti-Maduro
Come Venezuela political party (again see relevant articles).
ApolloCarmb (
talk) 19:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC) Struck content from confirmed sockpuppet, per
WP:SOCKSTRIKE
User:ZiaLater gain a consensus here please.
ApolloCarmb (
talk) 18:51, 6 May 2018 (UTC) Struck content from confirmed sockpuppet, per
WP:SOCKSTRIKE
I don't want this to escalate further, so I'm pinging other editors involved hoping that there's a better discussion @ Plastikspork: @ David O. Johnson: @ Leftwinguy92: @ Stalin990: @ Marco Antonio Merchán: @ Dereck Camacho: @ Patapsco913: -- Jamez42 ( talk) 15:00, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Yeah 93: Should the home state of the candidate by their residency or their birthplace? Bertucci was born in Guanare, Portuguesa. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 15:27, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
I suggest a section of the article is split in case it continues growing. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 14:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm currently editing extensively in the Spanish article about the election day and I don't have enough time to translate before the results. I'd really appreciate if someone is interesting in helping in the translation. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 18:16, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
The CNE turnout numbers have recently been described as "inflated" as it is called a pro-government entity. In a controversial setting like Venezuela, independent observers often make their own turnout estimates as well.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 03:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Iñaki Salazar:, for the time being I won't do a follow up of the discussion because I've kept working in the Spanish article, but to answer one of your edit summaries: these numbers are not unverified. Besides being referenced, Meganálisis published five bulletins before the final independent estimate. There are other estimates, some closer to the number given by the CNE, so they can be added as a range once they're included, but given the electoral history in Venezuela it is important to include independent numbers. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 03:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Here are some numbers to show the range of results.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 03:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
References
On your map Belarus looks like do not recognize election. On this monent official position not yet announced but I sure belarusian goverment will recognize this election, because Chavez and Maduro are friends of Lukashenko. http://www.belta.by/politics/view/fotofakt-na-izbiratelnom-uchastke-v-minske-prohodjat-vybory-prezidenta-bolivarianskoj-respubliki-303417-2018/ Sad but true) Sturisoma ( talk) 12:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Well. As I say about Belarus: https://news.tut.by/economics/593600.html Title translate - "Democracy win in Venezuela again" Sturisoma ( talk) 18:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Can someone consolidate the sources in the lede so it does not look like Wikipedia:OVERKILL? I can in a bit, but if someone wants to do this now, it would be helpful.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 18:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Done Got it.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 04:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
In the lede, the sources state that the United Nations has not recognized the democratic process in Venezuela. Recent edits have tried to downplay this information. The information must be restored.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 22:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
here is the source [1] and Belarus also recognizes elections [2] Fentrejones ( talk) 1:04 May 22, 2018 (UTC)
References
All of Europe is coloured in red due to a statement made by somebody in the EU Parliament. There is no evidence that all of the countries which are in the EU reject the validity of this election. The EU isn't a "country", different sovereign countries in the EU have different views on all mattr of things. Where is the evidence that, for example, all European nations have recalled their ambassadors from Venezuela or stated that they specifically reject the validity of the elections? IMO this is intentionally misleading to bolster the propaganda of the United States government. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 01:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Zia, the map is still problematic. According to the references in the article only France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom in Europe have made explicit statements rejecting the legitimacy of the election. A statement one person at the EU is not good enough to colour all of the sovereign countries in Europe in "red", until they have made individual statements on the issue. You need to change the map so that only those countries (UK, France, etc) who have made their own statements are included. Venezuela has direct diplomatic relations with individual European nations with their own Foreign Ministries. These relations are not organised through the EU. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 23:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
In relation to this edit, per WP:PUS I've removed all of the material which is sourced to telesur but do not express the views of the governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Uruguay, and Bolivia. Wingwraith ( talk) 07:56, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
LOL @ Wingwraith trying to claim Zia is actually bias in favour of President Maduro! OK. Wikipedia is an international project with a neutral point of view policy, its not 'Murika First-pedia or Libertarianopedia. You really need to understand this, we are not here to take sides on geopolitics in the article mainspace. The BBC has throughout most of its existence had MI5 vet its employees to make sure they have the right (capitalist, imperialist) views. We don't get to say that TeleSur isn't good enough because it doesn't support Anglo-American imperialism. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 23:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
North Korea and Antigua and Barbuda are missing from the map. Could they be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.62.87.16 ( talk) 12:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic and Japan were also included in the section. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 18:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Some images were recently removed from the "Background" section with the edit summary saying they were there for "shock value". These images provide a background regarding the electoral conditions and concerns facing Venezuela's decision. Discuss before removing this again.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 23:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi According to CNE, he is a registrated as COPEI candidate. -- Panam2014 ( talk) 16:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Should we create an article for legislative councils election ? Or add the results here ? -- Panam2014 ( talk) 23:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Creating a new section here to discuss this.
The reaction is different from recognition in these ways:
I propose that we summarize in the Reactions section the type of responses from governments (ex. "France, UK, US stated that the elections would not be democratic"). I think this would slim down the article some and would improve readability. I will get to work on it.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 07:27, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Notifying users often associated with elections for this discussion. @ Impru20: @ Panam2014: ---- ZiaLater ( talk) 09:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Jim1138: At the end of the sections that records the nations that have recognised the election it is mentioned that a lot of these carribean nations depend on Venezuelan oil. This is bias and propaganda through the back door. It is implicitly saying that is the only reason those nations recognised the result.
Another problem with this is that the source being used to source that statement does not even mention the presidential elections. The source states that these nations will oppose sanctions because they get oil, nothing is said about the presidential elections. So it appears whoever added this is drawing their own conclusions. 91.235.142.81 ( talk) 11:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
The "Vote Buying" section includes a photo and a quotation about a Carnet de la Patria, but nowhere in the article is there an explanation of why this is significant. Derek M ( talk) 20:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
See here. Is this article better off with that image? Is that image excessively POV. Is prose instead satisfactory? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 03:39, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
The idea that displaying the common occurrence of people eating from the garbage everywhere in the country is POV or astonishing ... is ... astonishing. I suppose the images of the hundreds of dead children are equally hard for the comfortable to see but no less a common fact. I do not think the images are well placed in this article, and there is too much sandwiching of text, but removing an image of daily life in Venezuela as POV is not on. I support the inclusion of the image. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:43, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
The lead states: "In the days thereafter, Albania, Canada, Iceland, Israel, Kosova(Kosovo?), the United States, and a number of Latin American countries recognized National Assembly Speaker Juan Guaidó as the legitimate Venezuelan President after the start of the 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis."
My thoughts are that whilte it's interesting that countries like Albania, Israel, Iceland, and Kosova(?) don't recognize the election, and do recognize Guaidó, due to the geographical location (ie South America, and not Europe or the Med) more importance should be placed on South American countries, as it is their continent and their neighbour. What I would recommend is switching out Albania, Israel, Iceland and Kosova(?) for Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Peru. Four for four. Let me know what you all think about this. Alcibiades979 ( talk) 16:43, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/17/world/americas/venezuela-cuban-doctors.html SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:13, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
"Considered a snap election, the original electoral date was scheduled for December 2018 but was subsequently pulled ahead to 22 April before being pushed back to 20 May.[5][6][7]" Does Venezuela law or the Venezuela Constitution actually allow for a "snap election"? UK law allows that; American law doesn't not. I'm surprised that nobody is challenging this. What does the rules actually say? Americans, in their own country, would not accept an illegally-timed election because it would violate the rules. 24.121.164.158 ( talk) 00:28, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
@ Deadrat: The latest editions have included unsourced content, unreliable source and removal of image without explanation. Elaborating the reasons may be easier.-- Jamez42 ( talk) 12:56, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Notrium and Jamez42: The phrase "voting activity" is misleading, and implies the government could have access to information about voting other than whether or not a person voted, such as what party or candidate was selected. The source makes clear that the information is limited to whether or not a person voted, so that should be reflected in our article. If there is a good reason for us to use a more vague and misleading wording, please explain it. — cmonghost 👻 ( talk) 05:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
One organizer of a food handout committee in the west-central city of Barinas said government managers had instructed her and colleagues to tell recipients their votes could be tracked. “We’ll find out if you voted for or against,” she said she told them.The other source is pure speculation and should be presented as such rather than as fact. Since additional explanation is necessary, I don't think these claims belong in the caption of the image of the card, which describes how the card works and is already quite long. The material could be added elsewhere in the article, but I am removing it from the image caption. — cmonghost 👻 ( talk) 14:03, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
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) 07:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
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) 05:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
A news item involving 2018 Venezuelan presidential election was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 21 May 2018. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The process so far has ton of irregularities in its process that should be explained in the article and translated from the Spanish Wikipedia. I'd love to give a hand if needed. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 14:06, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a particular reason to use blue as the color to identify Falcón? Blue is strongly associated with MUD and Falcón is not a MUD candidate. In Spanish orange it’s been use for him as is one of the colors of his party’s flag. Also in the case of Bertolucci green may be more suitable as his campaign logo uses a lot of it. -- Dereck Camacho ( talk) 23:00, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
May I ask why, on the map of international recognition of different presidents, one is red and one is green? The choice of those two colours is easy to read as bias. Perhaps more neutral colours should be used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CC62:6A00:CD7A:D3D6:7732:C1DB ( talk) 12:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
I just wanted to let know those interested that the electoral campaign started two days ago and that it will be 26 days long. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 23:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
All lot of these NGOs are led by the Venezuelan opposition.
Foro Penal provided free legal assistance to those involved in the
2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt against Hugo Chavez (see their article) and
Súmate is funded by the US government and is led by
María Corina Machado, a member of the anti-Maduro
Come Venezuela political party (again see relevant articles).
ApolloCarmb (
talk) 19:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC) Struck content from confirmed sockpuppet, per
WP:SOCKSTRIKE
User:ZiaLater gain a consensus here please.
ApolloCarmb (
talk) 18:51, 6 May 2018 (UTC) Struck content from confirmed sockpuppet, per
WP:SOCKSTRIKE
I don't want this to escalate further, so I'm pinging other editors involved hoping that there's a better discussion @ Plastikspork: @ David O. Johnson: @ Leftwinguy92: @ Stalin990: @ Marco Antonio Merchán: @ Dereck Camacho: @ Patapsco913: -- Jamez42 ( talk) 15:00, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Yeah 93: Should the home state of the candidate by their residency or their birthplace? Bertucci was born in Guanare, Portuguesa. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 15:27, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
I suggest a section of the article is split in case it continues growing. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 14:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm currently editing extensively in the Spanish article about the election day and I don't have enough time to translate before the results. I'd really appreciate if someone is interesting in helping in the translation. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 18:16, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
The CNE turnout numbers have recently been described as "inflated" as it is called a pro-government entity. In a controversial setting like Venezuela, independent observers often make their own turnout estimates as well.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 03:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Iñaki Salazar:, for the time being I won't do a follow up of the discussion because I've kept working in the Spanish article, but to answer one of your edit summaries: these numbers are not unverified. Besides being referenced, Meganálisis published five bulletins before the final independent estimate. There are other estimates, some closer to the number given by the CNE, so they can be added as a range once they're included, but given the electoral history in Venezuela it is important to include independent numbers. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 03:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Here are some numbers to show the range of results.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 03:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
References
On your map Belarus looks like do not recognize election. On this monent official position not yet announced but I sure belarusian goverment will recognize this election, because Chavez and Maduro are friends of Lukashenko. http://www.belta.by/politics/view/fotofakt-na-izbiratelnom-uchastke-v-minske-prohodjat-vybory-prezidenta-bolivarianskoj-respubliki-303417-2018/ Sad but true) Sturisoma ( talk) 12:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Well. As I say about Belarus: https://news.tut.by/economics/593600.html Title translate - "Democracy win in Venezuela again" Sturisoma ( talk) 18:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Can someone consolidate the sources in the lede so it does not look like Wikipedia:OVERKILL? I can in a bit, but if someone wants to do this now, it would be helpful.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 18:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Done Got it.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 04:31, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
In the lede, the sources state that the United Nations has not recognized the democratic process in Venezuela. Recent edits have tried to downplay this information. The information must be restored.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 22:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
here is the source [1] and Belarus also recognizes elections [2] Fentrejones ( talk) 1:04 May 22, 2018 (UTC)
References
All of Europe is coloured in red due to a statement made by somebody in the EU Parliament. There is no evidence that all of the countries which are in the EU reject the validity of this election. The EU isn't a "country", different sovereign countries in the EU have different views on all mattr of things. Where is the evidence that, for example, all European nations have recalled their ambassadors from Venezuela or stated that they specifically reject the validity of the elections? IMO this is intentionally misleading to bolster the propaganda of the United States government. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 01:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Zia, the map is still problematic. According to the references in the article only France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom in Europe have made explicit statements rejecting the legitimacy of the election. A statement one person at the EU is not good enough to colour all of the sovereign countries in Europe in "red", until they have made individual statements on the issue. You need to change the map so that only those countries (UK, France, etc) who have made their own statements are included. Venezuela has direct diplomatic relations with individual European nations with their own Foreign Ministries. These relations are not organised through the EU. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 23:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
In relation to this edit, per WP:PUS I've removed all of the material which is sourced to telesur but do not express the views of the governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Uruguay, and Bolivia. Wingwraith ( talk) 07:56, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
LOL @ Wingwraith trying to claim Zia is actually bias in favour of President Maduro! OK. Wikipedia is an international project with a neutral point of view policy, its not 'Murika First-pedia or Libertarianopedia. You really need to understand this, we are not here to take sides on geopolitics in the article mainspace. The BBC has throughout most of its existence had MI5 vet its employees to make sure they have the right (capitalist, imperialist) views. We don't get to say that TeleSur isn't good enough because it doesn't support Anglo-American imperialism. Claíomh Solais ( talk) 23:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
North Korea and Antigua and Barbuda are missing from the map. Could they be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.62.87.16 ( talk) 12:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
The Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic and Japan were also included in the section. -- Jamez42 ( talk) 18:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Some images were recently removed from the "Background" section with the edit summary saying they were there for "shock value". These images provide a background regarding the electoral conditions and concerns facing Venezuela's decision. Discuss before removing this again.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 23:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi According to CNE, he is a registrated as COPEI candidate. -- Panam2014 ( talk) 16:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Should we create an article for legislative councils election ? Or add the results here ? -- Panam2014 ( talk) 23:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Creating a new section here to discuss this.
The reaction is different from recognition in these ways:
I propose that we summarize in the Reactions section the type of responses from governments (ex. "France, UK, US stated that the elections would not be democratic"). I think this would slim down the article some and would improve readability. I will get to work on it.---- ZiaLater ( talk) 07:27, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Notifying users often associated with elections for this discussion. @ Impru20: @ Panam2014: ---- ZiaLater ( talk) 09:09, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Jim1138: At the end of the sections that records the nations that have recognised the election it is mentioned that a lot of these carribean nations depend on Venezuelan oil. This is bias and propaganda through the back door. It is implicitly saying that is the only reason those nations recognised the result.
Another problem with this is that the source being used to source that statement does not even mention the presidential elections. The source states that these nations will oppose sanctions because they get oil, nothing is said about the presidential elections. So it appears whoever added this is drawing their own conclusions. 91.235.142.81 ( talk) 11:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
The "Vote Buying" section includes a photo and a quotation about a Carnet de la Patria, but nowhere in the article is there an explanation of why this is significant. Derek M ( talk) 20:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
See here. Is this article better off with that image? Is that image excessively POV. Is prose instead satisfactory? Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 03:39, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
The idea that displaying the common occurrence of people eating from the garbage everywhere in the country is POV or astonishing ... is ... astonishing. I suppose the images of the hundreds of dead children are equally hard for the comfortable to see but no less a common fact. I do not think the images are well placed in this article, and there is too much sandwiching of text, but removing an image of daily life in Venezuela as POV is not on. I support the inclusion of the image. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:43, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
The lead states: "In the days thereafter, Albania, Canada, Iceland, Israel, Kosova(Kosovo?), the United States, and a number of Latin American countries recognized National Assembly Speaker Juan Guaidó as the legitimate Venezuelan President after the start of the 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis."
My thoughts are that whilte it's interesting that countries like Albania, Israel, Iceland, and Kosova(?) don't recognize the election, and do recognize Guaidó, due to the geographical location (ie South America, and not Europe or the Med) more importance should be placed on South American countries, as it is their continent and their neighbour. What I would recommend is switching out Albania, Israel, Iceland and Kosova(?) for Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Peru. Four for four. Let me know what you all think about this. Alcibiades979 ( talk) 16:43, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/17/world/americas/venezuela-cuban-doctors.html SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:13, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
"Considered a snap election, the original electoral date was scheduled for December 2018 but was subsequently pulled ahead to 22 April before being pushed back to 20 May.[5][6][7]" Does Venezuela law or the Venezuela Constitution actually allow for a "snap election"? UK law allows that; American law doesn't not. I'm surprised that nobody is challenging this. What does the rules actually say? Americans, in their own country, would not accept an illegally-timed election because it would violate the rules. 24.121.164.158 ( talk) 00:28, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
@ Deadrat: The latest editions have included unsourced content, unreliable source and removal of image without explanation. Elaborating the reasons may be easier.-- Jamez42 ( talk) 12:56, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Notrium and Jamez42: The phrase "voting activity" is misleading, and implies the government could have access to information about voting other than whether or not a person voted, such as what party or candidate was selected. The source makes clear that the information is limited to whether or not a person voted, so that should be reflected in our article. If there is a good reason for us to use a more vague and misleading wording, please explain it. — cmonghost 👻 ( talk) 05:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
One organizer of a food handout committee in the west-central city of Barinas said government managers had instructed her and colleagues to tell recipients their votes could be tracked. “We’ll find out if you voted for or against,” she said she told them.The other source is pure speculation and should be presented as such rather than as fact. Since additional explanation is necessary, I don't think these claims belong in the caption of the image of the card, which describes how the card works and is already quite long. The material could be added elsewhere in the article, but I am removing it from the image caption. — cmonghost 👻 ( talk) 14:03, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
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) 07:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
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) 05:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)