Jump to content

Talk:2021 Cuban protests: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 30: Line 30:
:Can you be more specific? Which sentence do you find inaccurate and why? [[User:Cambalachero|Cambalachero]] ([[User talk:Cambalachero|talk]]) 13:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
:Can you be more specific? Which sentence do you find inaccurate and why? [[User:Cambalachero|Cambalachero]] ([[User talk:Cambalachero|talk]]) 13:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)


::I'm not either of these folks, but notably Western outlets like the Guardian have been using photos from the much larger counter-protests in order to make the anti-Cuban protests appear better-attended. Additionally, it's becoming increasingly obvious that the #SOSCuba hashtag was Astroturfed, starting in Spain before being retweeted by a number of dormant low-follower accounts. Wikipedians often intentionally deprecate any news sites that might offer a counter-balance to US and UK corporate media in politically fraught situations like this, so I'm also wary about the bias on pages like this. [[Special:Contributions/161.11.160.44|161.11.160.44]] ([[User talk:161.11.160.44|talk]]) 14:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
::I'm not either of these folks, but notably Western outlets like the Guardian have been using photos from the much larger counter-protests in order to make the anti-Cuban protests appear better-attended. Additionally, it's becoming increasingly obvious that the #SOSCuba hashtag was Astroturfed, starting in Spain before being retweeted by a number of dormant low-follower accounts. Wikipedians often intentionally deprecate any news sites that might offer a counter-balance to US and UK corporate media in politically fraught situations like this, so I'm also wary about the bias on these sorts of pages. [[Special:Contributions/161.11.160.44|161.11.160.44]] ([[User talk:161.11.160.44|talk]]) 14:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:51, 14 July 2021

In the news nomination

Support in the infobox

From what I have seen before, placing parties for "support" in the infobox is typically only used when there is direct material support. For now, the support should be removed from the infobox until something firm happens. Until then, we can appropriately place the reactions of governments in the reactions section.--Simón, el Silbón (talk) 17:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. So far, we only have rhetoric from both sides, but no actual and sustained support. At least, nobody has provided sources to contradict this. "Support" in the infobox must be for only material or political support with actual effects and consequences on the ground. Coltsfan (talk) 17:57, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I support removing the parties which support the uprising. As of now, it lists the support of Cuba-American lobby, which may be inferred, but given it is not an official lobby group but simply a name that covers many organizations and persons it would be improper to include this in the infobox as no official citation can be made. Jurisdicta (talk) 04:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Protest locations in the infobox

I presume it would be inappropriate to include the United States in the location field of the infobox? Image2012 (talk) 05:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added it at one point, but self-reverted as there have also been protests in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Spain. At some point, it's overkill. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:41, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

In this page, Cuban or pro-Cuban cites is removed, but pro-protesters and pro-USA cites are accepted without any control. Is this really that, what you mean, when you talk about Wikipedia neutrality? 146.255.181.155 (talk) 09:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I second this, there have been fake news and fake images circulating and there is no mention in the article. There should be a not on the article for it, so readers are aware of biased opinions exposed in the article.

Can you be more specific? Which sentence do you find inaccurate and why? Cambalachero (talk) 13:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not either of these folks, but notably Western outlets like the Guardian have been using photos from the much larger counter-protests in order to make the anti-Cuban protests appear better-attended. Additionally, it's becoming increasingly obvious that the #SOSCuba hashtag was Astroturfed, starting in Spain before being retweeted by a number of dormant low-follower accounts. Wikipedians often intentionally deprecate any news sites that might offer a counter-balance to US and UK corporate media in politically fraught situations like this, so I'm also wary about the bias on these sorts of pages. 161.11.160.44 (talk) 14:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]