Jump to content

Talk:War of the Pacific

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Chelios123 (talk | contribs) at 04:05, 27 November 2013 (→Peruvian Repaso). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Peruvian Repaso

As User IggyAU in [1] already stated:

...regrettably all the references about the repaso are from peruvian sources...therefore its imperative to point this out in order to protect the integrity of this article....

I have nothing to add to IggysAU words. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 07:16, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cloudac,

do you agree to delete the biased theory of Repaso from the article ?. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 10:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You do not remove content just because of the nationality of the authors, prove they are unreliable first. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am guessing you did not see me previous comment? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:06, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And you have used article tags instead of section tags? Do you not know how to tag a section? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:43, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you are right. I deleted twice. If you think you can improve the tags, please, do it. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 12:12, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

The disputed text and its refs in plain text are:

After the Battle of Tacna, Chilean troops went as far as to enter field hospitals and execute all soldiers of the opposing Peruvian and Bolivian armies.

  • Reference="El expansionismo de Chile en el Cono Sur - Humberto Cayoja Riart - Google Boeken". Books.google.com. Retrieved 2012-11-02.
  • Reference="Narracion histórica de la guerra de Chile contra el Perú y Bolivia. Por ... - Mariano Felipe Paz Soldán - Google Books". Books.google.com. 2008-02-21. Retrieved 2012-11-02.

The repaso further incremented the number of Peruvian casualties in the battles of San Juan, Chorrillos, and Miraflores.

In the aftermath of the Battle of Huamachuco, Chilean Colonel Alejandro Gorostiaga ordered a repase under the pretext that they formed part of an irregular army and could therefore not be considered prisoners of war.

Peruvian Colonel Leoncio Prado was among the few soldiers who were not killed during the Huamachuco repase,

but was executed shortly thereafter.

That is the sources are

  1. Humberto Cayoja Riart El expansionismo de Chile en el Cono Sur
  2. Carlos Marнa Muсiz Historia del patriotismo, valor y heroнsmo de la Naciуn peruana en la guerra
  3. Jorge Basadre Historia de la Repъblica del Perъ, 1822-1933
  4. ? Sociedad Fundadores de la Independencia, Vencedores el Dos de Mayo de 1866 y Defensores Calificados de la Patria, 1943

The only acceptable source is Jorge Basadre Historia de la Repъblica del Perъ, 1822-1933 and must be cited correctly.

Mariano Felipe Paz Soldán, Narracion histórica de la guerra de Chile contra el Perú y Bolivia (a primary source), Humberto Cayoja Riart El expansionismo de Chile en el Cono Sur, Carlos Marнa Muсiz Historia del patriotismo..., ? Sociedad Fundadores de la Independencia, Vencedores el Dos de Mayo de 1866 y Defensores Calificados de la Patria, 1943 are Peruvian patriotic books edited to glamorize the country of Peru. As a historic source they are useless. If we acccept this kind of books, then we have to accept also such books from the other side. Then lost wikipedia any credibility. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 12:12, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide evidence for your claims, otherwise your accusations have no foundation.--MarshalN20 | Talk 12:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MarshalN20 is banned indefinitely from all articles, discussions, and other content related to the history of Latin America, broadly construed across all namespaces. (Indefinite).. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 18:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's also worth pointing out that in this earlier edit (see [2]), you went as far as to even delete the Jorge Basadre source that you now claim to be "[t]he only acceptable source". Please, Keysanger (or "KS"), you seem to have a major WP:COI (Conflict of Interest) in this topic. I recommend you avoid it.--MarshalN20 | Talk 12:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I be confused, all those sources support the content, why is only one OK? Darkness Shines (talk) 14:04, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, this source Andean Tragedy: Fighting the War of the Pacific, 1879-1884 (used for how lovey dovey they all were in combat) has on the next page a passage on how brutal the Chilean troops actually were. An American observer said out of 600 dead in one battle the most had been killed after surrendering or while wounded. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:15, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Darkness Shines,do you consider "Historia del patriotismo, valor y heroísmo de la Nación peruana en la guerra con Chile" by Carlos Marнa Muсiz a neutral objective and reliable source?. It is written to glamourize the Peruvian Nation. If we want to use this source as reference, we can do it, but then we have to use in-text attribution to the source, as in "According to the opinion of..." . --Best regards, KS (wat?) 18:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Darkness Shines, I looked in http://gso.gbv.de/DB=2.1/SET=1/TTL=1/LNG=EN/NXT (37,1 Mio. Titles),but there isn't present any title of Carlos María Muñiz.
  • Can you transcript the parragraph of carlos maria Muñiz's text that support the sentence given in the article?.
  • What do we know about this author?
  • Can you cite any other reference to this unknown book?
We have of this book only a title, an author and a webpage of google books (no text), and we know that it was written before 1908, that is a primary source.
If you want we can bring the case to the RSN. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 10:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Something written before 1908 is not a primary source, you may want to read up on WP:PRIMARY. I have asked an editor to send me the full quote. Who is the publisher for History of Patriotism? You did not respond to a single question put to you. Darkness Shines (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please, stop reverting until the case of User:Marshal is resolved. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 06:53, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not give a shite about your admin shopping nor accusations of meat. You can either respond to the questions put to you or what are the point of the tags? Darkness Shines (talk) 12:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been keeping an eye on this article for a while, last year I asked the question if there's any movies/TV shows on this war which I was promptly answered by keysanger and Marshal a few days later. Either way concerning the “Repaso”. In my experiences from reading Chilean texts on this war there's absolutely no references on repaso orders ever occurring. The only thing that comes close is the references that some Chilean generals had trouble maintaining infantry discipline after certain battle victories over Peru. In some cases looting and vandalism occurred and in some instances the murder of injured Peruvian soldiers. However the controversy here is that the Peruvian POV indicates that the murders were officially ordered by the Chilean generals as a tactic. There’s a discrepancy in viewpoints here. IMO the repaso story should either be removed or referenced as a Peruvian accusation or similar. Chelios123 (talk) 08:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neither in W. Sater "Andean Tragedy" nor in B. Farcau "Ten Cents War" is any reference to repaso and both are the most comprehesive works about the War in the English literature. The given references, Peruvian sources and most primary sources, include neither the parragraphs nor the page. No editor has delivered reliable sources or the context of Basadres citation. The editor who defends the inclusion of the §s has asked me Who is the publisher for History of Patriotism? . That is, he has no idea what he is doing. I proceed to delete the passage. If we don't get consensus, we can go to the RS Notice Board. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 16:39, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Stop removing it, if all that is needed is attribution then add that. Darkness Shines (talk) 09:40, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand the logic in keeping this "repaso" story as "offical" war strategy. It's clearly biased and the authenticity is very suspect. Based on the all sources for this "alleged" event the initial Peruvian historian who proposed the repaso was never actually in Peru when the War broke out. He was based in Argentina, and he publish his allegations there. You can make your own conclusions from that. Either way it's amazing this argument has been happening for well over a year. I applaud the editors who endeavor to keep the integrity of this article intact and I have very little to say for those who find it as their duty to publish and maintain unsubstantiated theories as fact. To sum it up. Repaso is a theory not fact. Chelios123 (talk) 04:04, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, as I have already pointed out above one of the sources used in this article speaks of no prisoners being taken, and of the wounded being killed. Darkness Shines (talk) 10:05, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be so kind to reproduce here the passage of the text, the author and book you mean it supports the text you added?. Please, don't forget that "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing a reliable source that directly supports the material" (WP:BURDEN). Your only word of honour isn't enough in WP. Sorry. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 11:08, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See my comment timestamped 14:15, 21 October 2013 Darkness Shines (talk) 11:13, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I have not the pleasure of understanding you. There is no passage, no page. Would you be so kind to reproduce here the passage of the text, the author and book you mean it supports the text you added?. Please, don't forget that "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and is satisfied by providing a reliable source that directly supports the material" (WP:BURDEN). Your only word of honour isn't enough in WP. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 13:16, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think its a good idea to move all the repaso theories into a new sub heading titled "Alleged Atrocities". Publishing all that information under war strategy seems inappropriate. what do you think?Chelios123 (talk) 11:17, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why alleged? Darkness Shines (talk) 15:29, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know that in the recent edit I made to the repaso piece I added the phrase "according to some historians". However a fairer supplement to the phrase should say "according to Peruvian historians". The edit should be made ASAP. In the "Secret Mutual Defense Treaty of 1873" part of the article there's a phrase saying "According to the Chilean historian Gonzalo Bulnes, Peru offered Argentina an outlet to the Pacific ocean through Chilean territories" that phrase is obliviously stating a Chilean POV. The repaso is clearly a peruvian POV and therefore an edit is justified for consistency.Chelios123 (talk) 14:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Query about this, "Peru offered Argentina an outlet to the Pacific ocean through Chilean territories" Did they ? Darkness Shines (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
the answers you seek are in the article. Chelios123 (talk) 04:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Economic depression

This section of the article handles almost only about the economic ressesion in Chile, and doesn't mention with due weight the situation in Peru and Bolivia. In Bolivia for example, the ten cents tax was an economic measure. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 07:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peruvian mediation

The whole section is a original research of the author, sentences like Under the impression that previous Peruvian demands had favored Bolivia, the Chilean government stalled. Chileans were further discomfited....

I cite WP:EDITORIALIZING: produce implications not supported by the sources. Words such as but, however, and although may imply a relationship between two statements where none exists, perhaps inappropriately undermining the first or giving undue precedence to the credibility of the second. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 07:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The section is confusing because it speaks of a tactical victory to Peru but Nevertheless, it was a Pyrrhic and later of the Peruvian navy still had some successful actions but but its remaining units were locked.

Moreover, the Captain Grau is named 12 times, more than all Chileans sailors in the whole article. It is very interesting that for the rescue of the Esmeralda sailors, held off the Chilean navy, held off the Chilean navy by Grau, the article uses more than the half of the section. For the desicive action, Angamos and Punta Gruesa, where the Peruvian Navy was destroyed, the article uses only two sentences. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 08:00, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pilcomayo, Alay

The article lacks inforrmation about the capture of the Alay and Pilcomayo. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 10:05, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mutual Defense Treaty of 1873

The whole paragraph presents the setcret treaty as a harmless alliance, but in reality the treaty was one of the causes of the war and during the Lackawamma conference Peru and Bolivia refused to deactivate the pact. It must be said that Chile saw pact as a aggressive one. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 08:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Boundary Treaty of 1866

The article says nothing about the Boundary Treaty of 1866.--Best regards, KS (wat?) 08:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Argentine and the Secret Treaty of 1873

The article says nothings about the Argentina and the secret offenssive pact

After the war

the article states:

The national treasury grew by 900% between 1879 and 1902 due to taxes coming from the newly acquired lands.[115] British involvement and control of the nitrate industry rose significantly.[116] High nitrate profits lasted for several decades, but fell sharply once synthetic nitrates were developed during World War I. This led to a massive economic breakdown (known as the Nitrate Crisis). Many industrial factories had closed in the early 1880s to provide labor for the extraction industry. Loss of industry dramatically slowed the country's industrial development. When the saltpeter mines closed or became unprofitable, the British companies left the country, destroying many jobs. The former Bolivian region remained the world's richest source of copper and its ports moved trade between nearby countries and the Pacific Ocean. The former Peruvian region suffered because no new sources of wealth appeared after the Nitrate Crisis.

That doesn't belong to the history of the war and it is mostly speculation of the authors. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 10:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fully funtionally Submarine?

Can anyone add some reference to this statement?. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 11:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About the recent editions

Keysanger, I have very little time now to answer every issue right now, but I noticed that you are systematically making changes that lean the article toward a POV based on the Chilean version of the facts, I remind you -again- that this not your article and that this is not the first time you try to do this, the archives of the talk page are proof of it, I ask you -very politely- to avoid include new information in the article without previously discussing it on this page, I am very busy right now(working) but I have not forgotten for a minute this article and I have no intention of leaving it under your control. Thanks and regards.--Ian (CloudAOC) | Talk 17:09, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CloudAOC, you have to explain which are the POV passages and why they are POV. Of course I give the reference to the changes. Pls, take it in account when you explain your POV. If you don't have time now, to answer every issue right now, then go and forget it for now. --Best regards, KS (wat?) 09:26, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I have a question, you said above, and removed content, because the sources were Peruvian, but the sources you just used are Chilean, why are those OK but not the Peruvian ones? Darkness Shines (talk) 11:26, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Cáceres, Andrés. "Memorias de la guerra del 79" pág. 231
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:War_of_the_Pacific&oldid=583484768"