Talk:2010 Ecuador crisis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Ecuador (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ecuador, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ecuador 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject International relations (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia.
If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Latin America (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin America 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Politics (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

The article has been several edited to emphasis a clear one sided political point of view[edit]

Requested move to 2010 Ecuador coup d'état attempt[edit]

Some links to consider[edit]

went away from the article for a few days, couldnt take the rough-and-tough warring here.

Ecuador to jail police over mutinyAmnesty opposed for Ecuador police Ecuador: Failed Coup or Institutional Crisis?‎ Also did we add both airports to the article? Lihaas (talk) 07:23, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Eva Golinger about CIA und NED involvement

http://www.chavezcode.com/2010/10/evidence-of-ned-fundingaid-to-groups-in.html http://www.chavezcode.com/2010/10/ecuador-what-really-happened.html http://www.adital.com.br/site/noticia.asp?lang=ES&cod=51542 --84.46.24.58 (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Academic analysis(es)[edit]

i started a section for academic opinions. In principle, academic opinions should probably be integrated into the text as a whole - but for the moment i don't see any easy way to do it, especially since the only academic opinion i've found so far more or less just lists the facts we already have in the article. An IP editor removed this on the grounds that it doesn't represent all academics. i have reverted the text, since the intention is that the present quote is clearly attributed to one particular history professor. There's no attempt to summarise all academics' opinions, which would be OR. If there are other RS'ed academic opinions, please, let's have them.

i put analysis which could be interpreted as either singular or plural (analysis in general), but it could later be changed to analyses if we get more than one.

It might be possible to put this as a subsection of the Reactions section, but IMHO it makes more sense as a section. In principle, historians don't just give their gut reaction or political opinion, they try to coldly assess the evidence for and against, check consistency with the historical record (e.g. sociological patterns that repeat for many decades generally don't stop happening suddenly without a dramatic reason), etc.

To user:109.178.44.2 - maybe you felt that the section title implies that most academics agree with Greg Grandin. That's not the intention. i've added a "section stub" tag, to make it obvious that the subsection is likely to be incomplete. Hope that helps. Boud (talk) 18:59, 11 October 2010 (UTC) (Minor corrections made to this comment, since i did actually put it as a section == rather than a subsection ===. Boud (talk) 19:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC))

I would suggest a subsection of reaction as somethin along the lines of "academia." Alternatively, it could go like the various election pages that have an analysis section, though ofcoruse with due caveats (which i see youve added)(Lihaas (talk) 06:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)).


Rename[edit]

Okey the dust appears to have settled. So I think it's time to see if we can shift to a less generic name. "Police rebellion" is my first thought but would someone like to present the case for coup?©Geni 23:04, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

It was a coup every leader of the region agree on that. This is bad even for wikipedia "Standards"--190.118.9.11 (talk) 01:21, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Hey Geni if there is not a concensus in considering it a coup detat(sadly for wikipedia honor(if theres any left)) why you continue with this issue? Do you want trouble??--190.118.9.11 (talk) 01:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

POV[edit]

The article is one-sided. For example, in Ecuador it's disputed whether Correa was actually kidnapped. His security detail brought him to the Police Hospital. According to some versions, no one except his staff and security could enter the floor we was in. Here's video of Correa as he entered the hospital: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0V_ELIOZcE 190.9.184.7 (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Eva Golinger?[edit]

Eva Golinger is too biased to be considered a reliable source. I suggest that we should remove those parts from the article, unless they can be substantiated by a more reliable, unbiased source. --Lacarids (talk) 07:55, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


Seconded

Lenbrazil (talk) 18:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)


'...higher-ranking officers exhorted "Kill the President"...', RELIABLE Citation needed.[edit]

The citation for the following passage:

On internal police radios, higher-ranking officers exhorted "Kill the President", "Kill Correa", "He won't get out alive today", "Kill them all, open fire, shoot them, ambush them, but don't let that bastard leave", "Kill that 'S.O.B.' Correa", in reference to Correa and ministers and secret service officers accompanying him.[36][citation needed](cited source is a blog)

...was Eva Golinger on her blog, she is an official mouthpiece of the Chavez regime. El Pais and ANDES gave no indication as to the ranks of the cops saying these things. If no other citaton is provided in about 7 days I will delete the passage especially since it is redundant. That is of course unless a more experienced editor disagrees.

Lenbrazil (talk) 18:44, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Done

Lenbrazil (talk) 15:31, 18 December 2012 (UTC)