Talk:Venezuela

Article reads as if written by CIA/U.S. State Dept

This article is so laughably biased in a reactionary right wing pro-U.S. government vein as to utterly lack any accuracy or balance. As another person has mentioned below, there is not a single entry in the article that details the ongoing U.S. government sabotage and interference in Venezuelan elections, economy, and politics. Right now some of the most extreme sanctions have been implemented by the Obama and Trump regimes totally crippling the Venezuelan economy. But does this crap Wiki entry mention anything about these crushing sanctions when bitching about how bad their economy is? No! Nothing. It is obvious that the US government is trying to do another one of their 'regime change' operations in Venezuela through sanctions to force an internal coup; but Wikipedia is so infested with State Dept trolls that they won't allow these important basic facts to be discussed here. The whole article seems like it was written by a U.S. State Dept employee. Probably not a single actual Venezuelan worked on it. Total crap hit piece. Disgraceful for rubbish such as this to be pawned off as "encyclopedic". This came directly from U.S. Ministry of Propaganda :-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deschutes Maple (talk • contribs) 14:33, 09 September 2018 (UTC)

Is there anything in particular you'd like to see changed? Remember that anything you want to add should be neutrally written and verifiable in reliable sources. Cheers, -- irn (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

It might help if sources like Granma and TeleSur were treated as RSes to the same extent that American papers are. Or if, alternatively, we cut all the newspapers out of the sources. Simonm223 (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Completely agree. -- SatanicSanta 01:59, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Are you trolling? Hegsareta (talk) 01:16, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Trolling is the internet word for winding people up, a kind of typed out prank phone call. I don't see what's "trolling" about pointing out that the United States is not the Arbiter of truth. 2A02:A442:581E:1:1D02:5E6:F97A:B4F3 (talk) 06:48, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

I agree with this completely. I encourage people to compare this article with those of other Latin American countries, the anti-Venezuela bias is immediately obvious. Just check out the intro for the article on Colombia, you would think it was a paradise and Venezuela an absolute hell hole. Also the sources used are laughably flimsy. Almost no peer reviewed articles or articles / books by regional experts, but rather fluffy hit pieces from CNN money and Bloomberg. Give me a break. They're about one step away from using Fox News as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.165.198.121 (talk) 03:16, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

The spanish version of the site reads alot more true to fact, and by being true to fact it, in an unbiased way, properly describes the degradation of the country under Chavez and Maduro. I don't know where you're getting your news from. If you have any doubts I invite you to Medellín, Colombia. We have tons of our venezuelan brothers here who have fled the repression, starvation, and violence endemic now in the country. Alcibiades979 (talk) 22:15, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

This article is also one-sided, i think; but the source dw.com normally tries to be neutral; and it seems to still be a nice overview (and many useful further links). Maybe it is worth to add to the 'See also' links ? But again, it does seem one-sided and i don't know. --- A visitor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.244.107.223 (talk) 04:32, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

I think that using Bloomberg, or the Wall Street Journal as a source for a socialist country is a joke. These sources are mouthpieces for the capitalist agenda. If it's a socialist country and you want to express a socialist opinion use a socialist newspaper like the Militant, which has been around for 75+ years, or others. Then you will get an opinion which matches the country. This entire article reads like a pro-reactionary pro-USA propaganda piece. I signed up to have a Wikipedia profile just to try and fix this article which was so badly anti-revolutionary Venezuela. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwickman76 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Acting President of Venezuela Juan Gerardo Guaido Marquez

There is a discrepancy of information the acting president of Venezuela is Juan Gerardo Guaido Marquez as of January 11, 2019. He is also the National Assembly president and as stated in his Wikipedia profile “As President of the National Assembly of Venezuela, on January 10th 2019, Guaidó assumed the role of Acting President of Venezuela under Article 233 of The Constitution of Venezuela.” This has to be amended immediately as the Venezuelan constitution articles 333, 233, and 350 allow for this scenario to be official. For a more formal reference contact the Organization of American States (OEA) whose president Luis Almagro recognized Acting President of Venezuela Juan Guaido as of this afternoon.

(Above was unsigned)

I believe this would be premature.

31.50.104.133 (talk)

Imaginary President Juan Gusano already has his own page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:a442:581e:1:1d02:5e6:f97a:b4f3 (talk) 06:50, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Several Latin American member states and observer states of the OEA have also demanded the resignation of Luis Almagro specifically for his conduct regarding Venezuela and Nicaragua, in violation of the OEA charter which requires non-interference and peace, so I'm not sure he's exactly the authority here. Perhaps we should take into consideration that Nicolás Maduro was democratically elected to be president and is recognized as the president by the overwhelming majority of the world's governments. -- SatanicSanta 01:57, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Oh also he has had a nice career working for the CIA and DEA: http://www.redvolucion.net/2019/05/01/luis-almagro-el-agente-secreto-de-la-cia/ -- SatanicSanta 01:58, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

POV - food waste

"In September 2016, a study published in the Spanish-language Diario Las Américas[127] indicated that 15% of Venezuelans are eating "food waste discarded by commercial establishments"." the study was not published by Diario Las Américas. it was not a study but a poll performed by MORE Consulting with a sample of 2000 people. "study" is a mistranslation. More information is needed regarding this poll as there is evidence that they do not understand basic nutrition. In particular, some of their conclusions are based on the idea that only premium cuts of meat and fish constitute an acceptable form of dietary protein while milk products, beans and grains do not constitute a dietary source of protein. Based on the absence of premium cuts of meat in a portion of Venezuelans' diets they concluded that these people do not eat any protein. They also conclude that a high quality diet includes a premium cut of meat with every meal.

more information is needed regarding what constitutes food waste and how much of their diet consists of 'waste'. many food bank programs around the world provide refuse as food. it's not clear whether they mean garbage out of a waste can or for example, nearly expired products or lower quality older products. In Australia it's common for charities to distribute day-old bread from 'baked fresh daily' bakeries for example which is a type of discarded refuse. american charities are known to distribute 'garbage' as it appears in the wiki or on an american charity website, "Surplus prepared meals, frozen and perishable product is rescued from grocery stores, bakeries, restaurants, hospitals, colleges, schools and grocery wholesalers in the Fargo-Moorhead and Bismarck-Mandan communities, and then distributed to shelters, soup kitchens and emergency food pantries." 49.198.21.145 (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

further illustrating my point, Australia is one of the most highly ranked countries in the world for standard of living on the OECD rankings yet Woolworths has donated an average of a million kilograms of 'food waste' a year for distribution by charities. a report from the Australian Government stated, "Food rescue organisations contribute to reducing wasted food that is suitable for human consumption. In rescuing food that would otherwise be thrown away, these organisations provide those in need with a meal, partly addressing food insecurity. A range of people access food relief in Australia. The number of people receiving food relief is high. One food relief organisation reports that each month 652,000 Australians receive food relief, with over 27 per cent of these being children." It can thus be concluded that food deemed suitable for human consumption remains food and not garbage. the USDA further explained the reasoning behind the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 and encourages the distribution and consumption of "food waste","Donations of non-perishable and unspoiled perishable food from homes and businesses help stock the shelves at food banks, soup kitchens, pantries, and shelters. Donations of perishable prepared foods, typically collected from restaurants, caterers, corporate dining rooms, hotels, and other food establishments, also play an important role in feeding families in need..."

Thusly, I argue that editors should refrain from using inflammatory language such as describing reclaimed food as garbage as it violates wiki policy by distorting the information at hand and POV pushing. 49.198.21.145 (talk) 23:32, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

References

Why do you keep saying 'waste can' the name in english is 'bin'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.216.24 (talk) 16:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Flag of Amazonas State.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:23, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

uprisinging in venezuela

The offical and acting president { for the most part anyway ] has had a uprising in venezuela with opposition troops and protests and on the last day of apirl even more since its national workers day and so far i can see that havnt been added in yet.

State Flag and not just flag?

I note underneath the image of country's flag that it says "State Flag." Shouldn't that just be "Flag" because it's a country?