Talk:2016 São Toméan presidential election

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

Africa: Sao Tome & Principe

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	São Tomé and Príncipe portal This article is supported by WikiProject Sao Tome and Principe.

Da Costa[edit]

@Batmacumba: According to the IFES, da Costa was an MLSTP/PSD candidate. Where did you see that he's an independent? Cheers, Number 5 7 11:12, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Da Costa hasn't been in MLSTP since 2005 and I find it highly unlikely that he has been readmitted to the party (or that they should have run two candidates). He has (or at least had in 2014) his own micro-party the National Platform for Development (PND), which has some local representatives. In 2011 both da Costa and Neves ran as independents while the official MLSTP candidate only got a little over 4% of the vote. Articles on the election have usually not been interested in exactly who Costa and Neves ran for. A long article in African Arguments (http://africanarguments.org/2016/07/14/everything-you-need-to-know-about-sao-tome-and-principes-presidential-elections/) mentions da Costa ran his campaign as someone who could unite all interests in the country (making it unlike he ran for MLSTP): "As well as attempting to capitalise on fears about possible ADI supremacy, Pinto da Costa’s has tried to present himself as the best candidate to bring together different political camps and create the conditions for dialogue between civil society and political structures". I managed to find this: http://pt.rfi.fr/sao-tome-e-principe/20160717-eleicoes-presidenciais-em-sao-tome-e-principe, which names no party for da Costa, but says Neves ran as an independent "with the backing of MLSTP", which sounds credible as it would allow her to appeal a bit broader (MLSTP has a high floor, but a low ceiling). She is an MP for the party. So I do not have a source that explicitly says he ran as an independent, but they all seem to take it for granted, and I assume it would have been mentioned if he had gone back to MLSTP (+ it is unlike the party would endorse more than one candidate, its too organized for that). This article says Neves had the backing of MLSTP: http://www.voaportugues.com/a/so-tom-presidenciais-maria-das-neves/3261568.html. Local media Téla Nón http://pt.rfi.fr/sao-tome-e-principe/20160717-eleicoes-presidenciais-em-sao-tome-e-principe doesn't seem to have the info, but they may bring more on the election later.--Batmacumba (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox for second round[edit]

What happens to the infobox since that only one candidate ran for the election in the second round? Do we just have one guy there? Or do we write "Did not run". Sputink (talk) 19:12, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Given da Costa's late withdrawal, I think it's appropriate to include him but note he boycotted it. Are you ok with what I've done? Number 5 7 20:36, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats good, I think it was significant enough for him to be in the infobox, seeing that he is the incumbent president. I wanted to add a map but the boycott means it will all be one color plus they took down the results from the first round. I mean who takes down results, its not like they were annulled, they just went to a second round. It might be interesting to include the percentage of people in each district that abstained from the vote. Its more than 50% in most places and the results are under the same link I used as a source in the second round results. Sputink (talk) 00:10, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]