Talk:President of Mexico
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Well, for this article "President of Mexico", I wrote the first article, since the one that was already there was only a redirect to the "List of Presidents of Mexico".
I think that the list of Presidents should remain here, after all, in "President of the United States", the list of US Presidents is shown in that page... If it the "List..." page is duplicated here, I think that maybe that page is the one that should be removed.
I only started the page, but know am imperfect and probably biased, so I really appreciate the corrections =)
What I would like to see is the list expanded, like listing the dates the Presidents held office, the political party they were of, their place of birth, and maybe, against whom they won the election (if any). I am making a small research for this purpose. Any other suggestions? May be we can plan the way this page ought to look and what it ought to have, and work towards such goal!
- I was just worried about having the same list (same information) in two places, in case one got altered and the other didn't – old Chinese proverb says man with two clocks never quite sure what time it is. But I'm not sure what the rule is, whether the list should stay here or there. I've seen a lot of separate "List of..." articles, but I wasn't aware that the US presidents were in the main article. So I don't really know.
- Your plans for expanding the list sound very good, too. A lot of that info. is already on the individual presidents' articles, but it certainly could be summarised into a table. I'm looking forward to seeing the article evolve! Sluj 20:47, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Why the article makes political campaign mentioning one current candidate and critizizing both the current holder and the previous in office? This shall be reviewed
- In addition to that the note on article 84 of the constitution is wrong, in abscence of the President the immediate holder is the President of the Supreme Court, in case there is more than 4 years before the next election he must call a election so a replacement get elected
71.244.229.180 03:18, 23 March 2006 (UTC)DC
Contents |
[edit] Former Presidents: Ernesto Zedillo
Why the discussion about Ernesto Zedillo? Just because he is the former President and thus still of interest? How about Carlos Salinas de Gortari? My understanding is that he was accused of corruption. Why is there no discussion of that in this article?
Note: I'm OK to leave Zedillo in if Gortari is also discussed. However, this leaves the door open to having a paragraph on each of the former Presidents of Mexico. A different approach would be to have this article discuss only the current President of Mexico, leaving the discussion of former Presidents for the History of Mexico article.
Your thoughts are solicited.
Richard 06:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- Re: I think that having Zedillo is only to show an example of what former Presidents do. Obviously, Salinas is too controversial a topic to deal with him in this page. However, I have added a line or two, just to have the sense of contrast of what other former Presidents do. Miguel de la Madrid, another Former President, is also mentioned.
- In any case, I think that the main focus of the "Former Presidents" section is to talk about what former Presidents do and how they live, and not to judge them. Each President has its own wikipage for that...
- Hari Seldon 03:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC -6)
Hello there, I know that the history of the presidents of Mexico can be kind of annoying, I read the article and saw the sign at the top announcing that this article is in disput. So, as good Mexican I looked for some information about the presidents and found a mexican webpage with the information needed in order to have more information.
I hope this can be useful, the bad thing is that the webpage is in spanish so a translation is needed, I will see if I can translate part of it.
Bye.
Francisco Ochoa
[edit] Please Summarize
Why is this article NPOVed? Can someone please explain how we can make this article better? Hari Seldon 21:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
http://www.presidentesdemexico.com.mx/
[edit] Gender?
Is is correct that one of the requirements for the President of Mexico is "son of either a Mexican father or mother"?
- Hello. I have cut-paste the article 82 of the Constitución. I hope it helps you--Youssef 06:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- Artículo 82
- Para ser Presidente se requiere:
- I.- Ser ciudadano mexicano por nacimiento, en pleno goce de sus derechos, hijos de padre o madre mexicanos y haber residido en el país al menos durante veinte años.
- II.- Tener 35 años cumplidos al tiempo de la elección;
- III.- Haber residido en el país durante todo el año anterior al día de la elección. La ausencia del país hasta por treinta días, no interrumpe la residencia.
- IV.- No pertenecer al estado eclesiástico ni ser ministro de algún culto;
- V.- No estar en servicio activo, en caso de pertenecer al Ejército, seis meses antes del día de la elección.
- VI.- No ser secretario o subsecretario de Estado, jefe o secretario general de Departamento Administrativo, Procurador General de la República, ni Gobernador de algún Estado, a menos de que se separe de su puesto seis meses antes del día de la elección; y
- VII.- No estar comprendido en alguna de las causas de incapacidad establecidas en el artículo 83.
-
- I think that the correct word would be "offspring", or "son or daughter" of Mexican parents. Basically, the article is saying that the person should be Mexican by birth, and not by adoption or naturalization. Hari Seldon 15:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
What it means is that the person has to be a mexican by birth (there's no gender specified) and a citizen (a person can be a mexican national without being a citizen like established by chapter I of the constitution, for example a convicted person loses their citizen prerogatives or rights according with article 38) with at least one mexican parent (Vicente Fox's mother is from Spain)and have lived in the country for at least 20 years --- Adrian Pineda
[edit] "Revolutionary"
The sentence sentence of this article says this:
Currently, the office of the president is considered to be revolutionary, in that he is the inheritor of the Mexican Revolution and the powers of office are derived from the Revolutionary Constitution of 1917.
What exactly does it mean for a governmental office to be "revolutionary"? There is no explanation of the term nor is there is link suggesting that I might go elsewhere to find out, nor does the article on the "Revolutionary Constitution of 1917" shed any light on the subject. 6SJ7 22:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
- I believe that is a literal translation of Convención Constitucionalista Revolucionaria de 1917 (Revolutionaries' constitutional convention of 1917). Titoxd(?!?) 06:27, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Let's not jump the gun here
The President of Mexico is Vicente Fox Quesada, not Felipe Calderón. Whatever you think of Calderón's politics, he will not be sworn in as President until December 1st. Out of respect to President Fox, put him as President until the 1st of December.
Felipe Calderon may be mentioned as Elected President, although it is being disputed and there's is the chance, although not likely, of new elections.
- Calderon has not been issued the constancia de mayoria yet. That's the only document that can show he's President elect. So no, he may not be mentioned as President Elect. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 12:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- However, Calderón is being referred to as the "winning candidate", despite not being "President Elect" yet. In any case, there is no longer any chance of new elections. Hari Seldon 13:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Of course, the media are calling him "winning candidate" and that can be widely referenced. However that's a different thing from being "President Elect", which has a precise definition in Mexican law. Since we are going for verifiability here, mentioning of the latter is inappropiate simply because it has not happened yet. And it's not true either that there's no chance for new elections: the Electoral Tribunal can call for new elections under an interim President if it deems necessary (although I must stress there is an extremely low chance of that happening). -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 14:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Numbering of presidents
Recenly, an editor came through and renumbred the presidents.[1] I believe it may be due to an interpretation of the dispute mentioned at List of Presidents of Mexico regarding the period of Maximillian's rule. Could interested editors please review the situation for NPOV? -Will Beback 22:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] November 30 or December 1
When does the six year term end? President Fox, is said to have left office Nov.30 (mid-night), yet President Calderon's inaguration (before the Congress) occured at Noon Dec.1? Doesn't this mean, there's a 12 hrs vacancy between the Presidential terms? Maybe this should be added to this article.GoodDay 16:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- The Constitutional term begins at Midnight on December 1st and ends at midnight on November 30th. (You are writing before noon, Mexico City time, of Dec. 1st, by the way). The issue of when the term begins, and when he gives the oath of office, however, are two separate issues. The ceremony before Congress is the ceremony of the Oath of Office; he is Constitutionally mandated to give the Oath, and the presidency can be declared vacant if he does not give the Oath of Office as mandated, but the term begins at midnight of December 1st. Magidin 16:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
- So, it's like this= Vincent Fox Dec 1, 2000-Nov 30, 2006 & Felipe Calderon Dec 1, 2006 - present. I'll reverse my mistakes, on the respective Mexican President biographies. Thanks for the clarification. GoodDay 17:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Order"
I am taking issue with the people numbering the Mexican presidents. It is just impossible do so! There are several episodes in history when Mexico had two, three, or no president at all, check out the War of Reform and the Second Empire during the 19th century or the Aguascalientes Convention in the 20th century. -- All-Bran 00:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
- Originally, I too numbered the Mexican Presidents. But now, I'm in agreement with you. It's impossible to number them accurately, so we shouldn't number them at all. GoodDay 00:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of obscene language.
Someone should remove the lines The "is a huge ass whole" from the article.
- It is done periodically. Unfortunately, there is only so much an editor can do against vandalism.
- Other editors, would you like to vote on weather or not this article sould be semi-protected?
- Hari Seldon 23:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
