Jump to content

Talk:Venezuela: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Files used on this page or its Wikidata item are up for deletion
→‎Telenovelas: new section
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit New topic
Line 216: Line 216:
* [[commons:File:Venezuela Product Exports (2019).svg|Venezuela Product Exports (2019).svg]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2023-03-23T15:28:49.058127 | Venezuela Product Exports (2019).svg -->
* [[commons:File:Venezuela Product Exports (2019).svg|Venezuela Product Exports (2019).svg]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2023-03-23T15:28:49.058127 | Venezuela Product Exports (2019).svg -->
Participate in the deletion discussion at the [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Dave-landry-datawheel|nomination page]]. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 15:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Participate in the deletion discussion at the [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Dave-landry-datawheel|nomination page]]. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 15:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

== Telenovelas ==

I think there used to be a section for TV in Arts where Venezuela Telenovelas under the industry Venevision was put but now I can't find it; if not I think it should be added because Venezuela has produced many Telenovelas in the Spanish speaking world it can't be ignored [[User:Nlivataye|Nlivataye]] ([[User talk:Nlivataye|talk]]) 06:34, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:34, 2 April 2023

Template:WP1.0 Template:Vital article Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Former good article nomineeVenezuela was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 19, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
October 31, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 5, 2004, July 5, 2005, July 5, 2006, July 5, 2007, July 5, 2008, July 5, 2009, July 5, 2010, July 5, 2011, July 5, 2012, July 5, 2013, July 5, 2014, and July 5, 2016.
Current status: Former good article nominee

Etymology - Little Venice

In the 16th Century there was a colony called Klein-Venedig (q.v.), which is the German rendition of Little Venice. So it would help the discussion of the Little-Venice theory of the name Venezuela if the existing discussion had dates for when the two different etymology hypotheses arose and for a bonus, it would help if the German colony's name would also be accounted for. Cardiffman (talk)

COVID-19

It would help to have a history update, including the country's response to the pandemic as well as more recent financial conditions. Kdammers (talk)

Venezuelan Government.

I don't think a federal republic would just cut it. Venezuela is definitely more authoritarian, with its rule being described as dictatorial. CracksInTheFloor (talk) 05:09, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree personally. Patriciogetsongettingridofhiswiki (talk) 03:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It got added thankfully a couple days ago. Patriciogetsongettingridofhiswiki (talk) 03:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2022

change "In the 16th century, during the Spanish colonization, indigenous peoples such as many of the Mariches, themselves descendants of the Kalina, converted to Roman Catholicism" to "In the 16th century, during the Spanish colonization, indigenous peoples such as many of the Mariches, themselves descendants of the Kalina, were converted to Roman Catholicism" under German colonization. Ipsitad (talk) 02:51, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RealAspects (talk) 11:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 December 2022

Change "for by president" to "by president". It's been wrong since: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Venezuela&diff=1040938757&oldid=1040754781

 Done Largoplazo (talk) 03:10, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Government

Under its government it should say ”Federal presidential republic under an authoritarian dictatorship” instead of just “Federal presidential republic”. 67.246.161.112 (talk) 03:31, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a good idea. That involves some pretty complicated value judgements that we'd best avoid. Carptrash (talk) 06:31, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Partly done as per content in lead and article .....more sources added to bulk up and for educational reference. Federal semi-presidential republic under an authoritarian regime[1][2][3][4]

References

  1. ^ Corrales, Javier (2020). "Authoritarian Survival: Why Maduro Hasn't Fallen". Journal of Democracy. 31 (3). Project Muse: 39–53. doi:10.1353/jod.2020.0044. ISSN 1086-3214.
  2. ^ The Path Toward Authoritarianism in Venezuela, Oxford University Press, 2019-10-30, doi:10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0286
  3. ^ Corrales, J. (2022). Autocracy Rising: How Venezuela Transitioned to Authoritarianism. G - Reference,Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects Series. Brookings Institution Press. p. intro. ISBN 978-0-8157-3807-7.
  4. ^ "Battling Authoritarian Regimes in Venezuela and Beyond: A Conversation with Venezuelan Opposition Leader Leopoldo López". David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies. 2022-04-25. Retrieved 2023-01-13.
I disagree. A statement like "authoritarian regime" is a charged statement subject to heavy debate and, like Carptrash stated, vulnerable to NPOV discussions (not the most neutral of statements). Venezuela is also not a semi-presidential republic, because it has no prime minister. It is a full presidential republic. I think Venezuela should be classified a federal semi-presidential republic as before and left to interpretation of its situation through the lead. -HandIsNotNookls (talk) 22:30, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Any source for this POV? /// "heavy debate " is BS. Lets stay clear of guess work and fallow the sources. Lets not remove sources because we dont like the content....leave the sources so our readers can learn about what is going on. Very odd to blank sources out of the blue 3 times you have removed this longstanding content.Moxy- 13:25, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed this info 3 times because this same discussion has already been had to exhaustion multiple times on this talk page. The consensus each time has been to remove anything except the mention of a federal presidential republic to maintain neutrality. This is not "longstanding content" and is not consensus on this Wikipedia page.
Suggesting that I'm removing this information because I "don't like the content" is a disingenuous argument and unfortunate to see on Wikipedia. De jure, regardless of opinion, Venezuela is constitutionally a democratic presidential republic with regular elections. Whether these elections are actually valid or not can easily be discussed in the lead or within the article's body. No need to skew the reader's opinion by putting one side of a heavily disputed argument in the lead of an article's infobox. Readers should be able to appreciate both sides of a situation.
Again, for the record, I vote to remove the "authoritarian regime" excerpt from the article's infobox, as previous discussions have yielded. Another suggestion could also be to place a note in the infobox stating that the current government's validity is questioned and that some consider it authoritarian. But I do not agree with writing it directly in the infobox.
I hope this added to the discussion. Let's try to please keep a healthy, constructive dialogue from here forth. After all, this topic interests all of us the same. HandIsNotNookls (talk) 21:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Need to refute the sources. Cannot simply ignore them at a whim. Moxy- 00:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I started looking at the sources and one seems to be by an opposition leader, hardly neutral, and another states, "Ever since Hugo Chávez came to power, scholars and policy experts have debated about whether the regime in Venezuela should be characterized as an authoritarian one." Again, not really a ringing endorsement. I agree with HandIsNotNookls, that stuff should go. Carptrash (talk) 05:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bull shit ...got a source for that POV. see List of freedom indices
Country Freedom in the World 2022[1] 2022 Index of Economic Freedom[2] 2022 Press Freedom Index[3] 2021 Democracy Index[4]
 Venezuela 5 not free 5 repressed 5 very serious situation 5 authoritarian regime

Moxy- 14:07, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The quote I included is from a source already there, #2. Also I think using language such as "Bull shit" is not a good idea. Carptrash (talk) 17:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The United Nations, the International Fact Finding Mission in Venezuela, the Organization of American States, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights have repeatedly and for several years documented the lack of human rights, civil liberties, separation of powers and judiciary independence in Venezuela. We can change the sources if the community wishes to do so, but this can't be just swept under the rug. --NoonIcarus (talk) 22:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC) [reply]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference FreedomInTheWorld was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference IEF was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference RWBPFIndex was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ "Democracy Index 2021: the China challenge". Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved 2022-08-19.

"President Nicolás Maduro (disputed)"

Presently the infobox gives "President: Nicolás Maduro (disputed)".

Seriously, this isn't much disputed anymore, is it? It is like saying in the US article: "President: Joe Biden (disputed)", as Trumphers still dipute the 2020 election.

If I don't have any serious objections: I will remove the "disputed" link, Huldra (talk) 21:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

Question: Should the infobox contain:

  • Not disputed: President: Nicolás Maduro, or
  • Disputed: President: Nicolás Maduro (disputed)

Huldra (talk) 21:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote:

Comment December 31, 2022: Venezuelan opposition strips Juan Guaidó of ‘presidential’ role: "In a poll taken by Venezuela’s Andres Bello University in November, only 6% of Venezuelans said they would vote for Guaidó if he participated in presidential primaries next year".
Jan 5, 2023: U.S. no longer recognizes Guaidó as Venezuela's president, Biden official confirms. Hasn't this farce gone on long enough? Huldra (talk) 20:16, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is completely unrelated to Maduro's recognition, which is another matter entirely, and does not answer the points that I raised. The United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, which so far have acknowledged Guaidó's removal, have reaffirmed that they only recognize the opposition Assembly as the only legitimate body in the country. Internationally, nations have not changed their stance towards Maduro because of this. --NoonIcarus (talk) 22:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see: it is disputed, there is just no person it is disputed with; LOL. And not recognising is != to that he isn't; ie lots of countries doesn't recognise North Korea, but it is still not disputed who is the leader there. Huldra (talk) 23:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No need for the sardonic tone. --NoonIcarus (talk) 23:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reporting on this said: If approved next week, opposition lawmakers will then choose five representatives for the board of directors that will head assets held abroad, and Guaido's interim presidency, along with his government, will be removed.[1] In other words, not returning legitimacy to Maduro or dropping contestation of his election, just removing Guaido. BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's not a matter of if there's another party in the dispute, but that Maduro's legitimacy to the position is disputed and remains internationally sanctioned as such, which is a fact that hasn't changed. The tag has been added as early as 12 January, weeks before Guaidó declared himself president. --NoonIcarus (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Our Belarus article (see 25stargeneral below) says "disputed" next to the president's name despite absence of a single rival. BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not disputed. While there remains an opposition National Assembly, there is no remaining claimant to the role of President. The appropriate way to address arguments about the propriety of the 2018 election is in the body of the article (and it is already in the body of the article). JArthur1984 (talk) 15:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disputed More countries consider Maduro's presidency illegitimate than not, which warrants some mention. Where is this idea coming from that there has to be another claimant to the presidency for it to be considered disputed? That sounds like an arbitrary rule rather than any serious examination of reliable sources. That's not what happened at Belarus when Lukashenko's re-election was widely rejected by the international community, even though they didn't recognize Tsikhanouskaya. Whether it's in dispute is a matter of how reliable sources talk about legitimacy. 25stargeneral (talk) 04:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not disputed. There is no serious dispute within the framework of the Venezuelan legal system. If we labeled someone as disputed simply because anyone, anywhere disputes their rule, we would end up with nonsense like Joe Biden being labeled as disputed as well. International sanctions are a bad metric to go by because it would mean we would label any leader as disputed the moment foreign governments start to push for regime change - the government of eg. the United States does not have any say whatsoever in whether the leader of Venezuela is legitimate or not. --Aquillion (talk) 19:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not disputed. Disputed is different from illegitimate. Regardless of whether he was elected democratically or not, there is no longer any credible disputant. Questions about the legitimacy of Venezuelan elections should be covered in more detail in the body. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Afaict, we all agree that no one else claims to be president of Venezuela. So what is this so-called dispute about? It has been suggested, without evidence, that some foreign countries only recognise the opposition Assembly as the only legitimate body in Venezuela. Nevertheless, assuming this is accurate, why is the view of foreign countries relevant to the position of president of Venezuela? The people of Venezuela choose their president. We can include the views of these foreigners in the body of the article if we consider them sufficiently important. Burrobert (talk) 05:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the sources for the United States ([1]), Canada ([2]) and the United Kingdom for the comments that I did above ([3]):
  • Instead, they said the U.S. recognized the National Assembly elected in 2015, which Guaidó had led, as Venezuela's "only remaining democratically elected institution." (US)
  • Canada respects and recognizes the decision of the National Assembly to extend its authority as it is the last democratically elected institution in Venezuela, elected by the Venezuelan people in 2015.[4]
  • We continue to consider the National Assembly elected in 2015 as the last democratically elected National Assembly in Venezuela, and we take note of the vote extending its mandate for another year. (UK)[5]
At any rate, Responses to the Venezuelan presidential crisis#Recognition of opposition National Assembly can be consulted for support stances; not only for Guaidó at its moment, but also the opposition National Assembly. Even the Organization of American States has disavowed Maduro.
Likewise, it is misleading to characterize this rejection as only foreign. If you wish to know what does the Venezuelan people think, Movimiento Estudiantil,[6] the Episcopal Conference of Venezuela([7]) and the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce([8]) have all disputed the last presidential elections (as well as NGOs such as Foro Penal, Súmate, Voto Joven, the Venezuelan Electoral Observatory and the Citizen Electoral Network), and polls that year showed that Maduro would lose by a wide margin. Parties were disqualified, opposition candidates were barred from running, and there were widespread irregularities. All of these reasons are why Maduro's position has been disputed in the first place. --NoonIcarus (talk) 11:50, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The opinions of three Venezuelan groups from 2018 are not relevant to the current situation. Policy tells us that Wikipedia is not a reliable source and the article about Responses to the Venezuelan presidential crisis is a good example. According to that article, 48 countries still recognise Guaidó as president.Burrobert (talk) 12:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I referred to the Wikipedia article just as a reference for other users and not as a source to back up my claims, just as you can see 2018 Venezuelan presidential election#Opinion polls and see that I'm not merely talking about "three Venezuelan groups". The references in the section that you are looking for are the following: [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]

Why are the opinions of foreign bodies from 2019 relevant to the discussion? Burrobert (talk) 14:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is very poor form to change or add to your comment after another editor has replied to it. You’re living in the past, man. You’re hung up on some clown from the 60’s, man! Burrobert (talk) 14:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop the disrespect, it is not the first time that you mock replies. WP:TALK#REVISE establishes that an editor can edit own comments freely if these are done with a different style, just as I did. I underlined the text, as I first thought the convention was with italics, but other readers should already known the comment was added after the original comment. --NoonIcarus (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read the policy that you linked to? It says:
So long as no one has yet responded to your comment, it's accepted and common practice that you may continue to edit your remarks for a short while to correct mistakes, add links or otherwise improve them. ... But if anyone has already replied to or quoted your original comment, changing your comment may deprive any replies of their original context, and this should be avoided.
It then suggests ways you can add or change to your comments, one of which is underlining, which you only added text after I had pointed out your indiscretion. The policy then says
Best practice is to add a new timestamp ... after the original timestamp at the end of your post
which you have not done.
Anyway, all of this would have been unnecessary if you had just made a new comment.
By the way, it's a meme. Burrobert (talk) 00:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The people of Venezuela choose their president — this is false and I find it in poor taste. Maudro is a dictator who rigged the 2018 election in his favor. There was no legitimate choice. Hence why these "foreigners" you speak of have inconvenient "views". 25stargeneral (talk) 05:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your outrage would be better directed at forces closer to your home, but that's an argument for the pub, not for a Wikipedia talk page. The idea that any country's citizen's should choose their own elected officials and that foreign countries should not interfere in that process is not controversial. There may even be some international laws which mention it. Burrobert (talk) 07:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They should be able to choose, that's my point. Do you actually not understand that Venezuela is a dictatorship or are you trolling? 25stargeneral (talk) 07:39, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I literally just added above some few examples, of the many, of why the elections were not considered legitimate. Literally the article's introduction says outright that it is considered by some as a "sham election". If there were better conditions, that would have been another story. --NoonIcarus (talk) 11:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you actually not understand that Venezuela is a dictatorship or are you trolling? My views on Venezuela are completely irrelevant as are yours. Burrobert (talk) 11:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I literally just added above some few examples ... Why are opinions from 2018 and 2019 relevant here? Burrobert (talk) 11:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
1) They're facts, not opinions. 2) The most recent presidential election was 2018. 25stargeneral (talk) 00:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, the old "nobody knows the truth so it's all opinion and we might as well give a WP:FALSEBALANCE." There is such a thing as objective fact here, supported by overwhelming evidence. There is no uncertainty on this among scholars studying Venezuelan politics. 25stargeneral (talk) 00:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Lawler, Dave (2023-01-04). "U.S. no longer recognizes Guaidó as Venezuela's president, Biden official confirms". Axios. Retrieved 2023-01-05.
  2. ^ "Canadá "respeta" la eliminación del Gobierno interino de Guaidó en Venezuela" [Canada "respects" the elimination of Guaidó's interim government in Venezuela]. SwissInfo (in Spanish). 2023-01-06. Retrieved 11 January 2023.
  3. ^ "Reino Unido «respeta» eliminación del interinato de Guaidó, pero seguirá sin reconocer a Maduro". Al Navío. Retrieved 13 January 2023.
  4. ^ Canadá respeta y reconoce la decisión de la Asamblea Nacional de extender su autoridad ya que es la última institución elegida democráticamente en Venezuela, elegida por el pueblo venezolano en 2015.
  5. ^ Seguimos considerando a la Asamblea Nacional elegida en 2015 como la última Asamblea Nacional electa democráticamente en Venezuela, y tomamos nota de la votación que extiende su mandato por un año más
  6. ^ Brito, Karen (20 February 2018). "Movimiento Estudiantil Venezolano sobre elecciones presidenciales: Buscan perpetuar el infierno y la miseria". El Nuevo País. Archived from the original on 10 June 2018. Retrieved 4 May 2018.
  7. ^ Brito, Sharon (14 May 2018). "Conferencia Episcopal Venezolana pidió nuevamente postergar las elecciones del 20M". El Universal. Retrieved 16 May 2018.
  8. ^ "Fedecámaras aseguró que las elecciones del 20-M sólo agravarán la crisis". El Nacional. 15 May 2018. Retrieved 16 May 2018.
  9. ^ "Comunicado de Cancillería sobre Venezuela: Argentina llamó a "recuperar la normalidad democrática"" [Foreign Ministry Communiqué on Venezuela: Argentina called to "recover democratic normality"]. Página 12 (in Spanish). 6 January 2020. Retrieved 27 February 2020.
  10. ^ Hanke, Jakob; von der Burchard, Hans (24 January 2019). "Brussels caught off-guard by Venezuela's political turmoil". POLITICO. Retrieved 26 January 2019. In a declaration published late Wednesday, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said the EU ... "fully supports the national assembly as the democratically elected institution whose powers need to be restored and respected." ... Kocijančič said Mogherini's statement had been "agreed with all 28 member states" ...
  11. ^ Trujillo, Carlos (10 January 2019). "Permanent Council Approves Resolution to Not Recognize the Legitimacy of the Maduro Regime". U.S. Mission to the Organization of American States. Retrieved 16 January 2019.
  12. ^ "Concerned Guyana government urges dialogue as Venezuela's woes worsen". Kaieteur News. 25 January 2019. Retrieved 29 January 2019.
  13. ^ Editorial staff (12 February 2019). "Italy recognises Venezuela's National Assembly". Momento Italia. Retrieved 18 February 2019. ... foreign minister Enzo Moavero Milanesi told lawmakers on Tuesday. "The Government acknowledges the full legitimacy of (Venezuela's) National Assembly which was elected regularly in conformity with international standards (in 2015)," ... Making no explicit reference to Venezuela's opposition-held National Assembly leader Juan Guaido, Moavera said ... "The government does not recognise the legitimacy of the last presidential polls and consequently Nicolas Maduro's presidency ... This is why the government ... calls for fresh presidential elections which are free, transparent and democratic"
  14. ^ "Liberia's Weah Sides with Us President Trump On Venezuela". 30 May 2019.
  15. ^ "Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the EU on the new mandate of President Maduro – Consilium". Council of the European Union. European Union. 10 January 2019. Retrieved 24 February 2019.

Fix misspelling

Under German Colonization, fix 2nd to last line: The Welsers transported German miners to the colony, in addition to 4,000 African slaves to paint sugar cane plantations.

to The Welsers transported German miners to the colony, in addition to 4,000 African slaves to plant sugar cane plantations. 2600:1702:9D0:A40:DD19:F5BC:CDBA:E82F (talk) 04:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Largoplazo (talk) 10:49, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

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) 15:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Telenovelas

I think there used to be a section for TV in Arts where Venezuela Telenovelas under the industry Venevision was put but now I can't find it; if not I think it should be added because Venezuela has produced many Telenovelas in the Spanish speaking world it can't be ignored Nlivataye (talk) 06:34, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Venezuela&oldid=1147793357"